Find a Lawyer

FAROOQ IMRAN versus NAEEM AHMED SIDDIQUI

Section 12 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) of the property sale agreement was approved in an agreement between the parties in the suit, which stipulates that the party deposit the balance amount on a fixed date. Will The party failed to deposit the due date and the extension requested was not extended in time by the trial court as well as the High Court, under the validity of the petition, only with the permission of the Opposition Principals' Petition. Can only be extended for a holiday. In the circumstances, the appeal against the High Court order was dismissed

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2009

• SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE v. ZAHOOR AHMAD JAVED 2009 PLC(CS) 141
• MUHAMMAD ILYAS v. SHAHID ULLAH 2009 PLD 146
• SHAHZAD AHMED v. Mian MUAZZAM SHAH 2009 SCMR 150
• Chaudhry MUHAMMAD SHARIF v. State 2009 SCMR 154
• Dr. MUHAMMAD SHAHBAZ MUFTI v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Chief Secretary 2009 SCMR 160
• NAZIR AHMAD PANHWAR v. GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Sindh 2009 PLC(CS) 161
• TAHIR JAVED v. State 2009 SCMR 166
• SHAFI MUHAMMAD SAND v. GOVERNMENT OF SINDH 2009 SCMR 173

All Supreme Court judgments of 2009 →

property advocates from Dera Bugti lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes