Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ALI versus GHULAM MUHAMMAD

Section 100 and OXL, R1 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Section 5 and Article 156 Second Appeal, along with a delay of 12 days, along with a photocopy of the certified copy of the decree and 3/2 year After filing a certified copy of the decree. Appeal without application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1908 Validity Appellant had to explain the delay of every day Appellant's lawyer expressed his inability to move forward for any reason late in filing the appeal. The High Court dismissed the appeal as timely and sustained. do not have.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010

• ABUL HUSSAIN v. TARIQ CASTING PROPRIETORSHIP 2010 YLR 2683
• TAHIR MUGHERI v. State 2010 YLR 2693
• Mrs. AFROZE SHAH v. SABIR QURESHI 2010 YLR 2697
• SALEEM UNAR v. State 2010 YLR 2705
• TAHIR AVENUE through President v. Mirza AHMED BAIG 2010 YLR 2723
• MASHOOQUE CHANDIO v. State 2010 YLR 2741
• MUHAMMAD SHARIF v. State 2010 YLR 2745
• ZULFIQAR ALI SOLANGI v. TALUKA COUNCIL MEHAR through Taluka Nazim 6 2010 YLR 2753

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2010 →

solicitors from Bahawalpur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes