Find a Lawyer

LIAQUAT ALI versus MUHAMMAD SAEED

The performance of students for termination of section 13 litigation ib Then the mention of the locksmith about the location of the abductor was not as important as the date and time when the date of the plaintiff / former ambassador was required in any case. Was. And in the specific terms the time of the commencement or knowledge of the limits so that it was necessary to calculate the extent to which the date and time of the performance of the petitioner was required to be given in the same assembly and before it was dissolved. Since then students have had to calculate a 15 day limit for performance

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009

• SHAKEEL AHMAD v. ABDUL GHAFFAR 2009 YLR 1384
• EHTASHAM-UL-HAQ v. State 2009 PCrLJ 1388
• MUHAMMAD ASLAM v. NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN 2009 CLD 1389
• MUHAMMAD AKBAR alias ABBI v. State 2009 YLR 1391
• IMTIAZ RASHEED QURESHI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Power, Islamabad 2009 CLC 1391
• CITIZENS INVESTMENT CO. v. ASKARI LEASING LTD. 2009 CLD 1392
• AVARI HOTELS LIMITED through Controller v. DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE AND TAXATION GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, through Secretary 2009 CLC 1399
• SHAFQAT ALI v. Mst. RIFFAT NAZIR 2009 MLD 1403

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2009 →

property advocate from Ghazi lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes