PERAC RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION (PRDF), KARACHI versus NATIONAL REFINERY LIMITED
Sections 39, 42 and 54 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. XXXX, RR1, 2 and Section 94, 151 of the Suite Declaration, of the Interim Order of the Covenant for the Cancellation, Recovery, Permanent Order of Dismissal and the Award of Damage The plaintiff claimed in connection with the previous arrangements and as a plaintiff that the plaintiff's license agreement had participated in the plaintiff's 26,035 square yard premises for the plaintiff under the terms and conditions set by the plaintiff. The reason for the dispute arose when the defendant's privatization process was finalized, between the defendant and the plaintiff between the plaintiff and the plaintiff between the plaintiff and the plaintiff illegally and fraudulently by other persons. Who had no legal authority to act on behalf of the plaintiff, which was in fact The plaintiff's employees also claimed that a registered contract could not be amended or amended or amended or unregistered; and that the amended agreement added new clauses and the approval and approval of the plaintiff's board of trustees. Without the old clauses were amended, those clauses were detrimental to the rights and interests of the plaintiff and were a violation of the original terms. Accuracy of the old unanimous belief The terms of the prima fax, the revised license agreement were implemented with the knowledge of the plaintiff's board of trustees. But the legal status of the amended license agreement can only be determined when the defendant, in the circumstances, was instructed, after the evidence of all parties to be recorded, that the plaintiff could be excluded from the suit until the final decision of the case. Do not interfere, subject to the claimant. Do not commit any breach of license agreement
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
