Find a Lawyer

HABIB BANK LTD. THROUGH AUTHORIZED ATTORNEYS versus WISDOM EDUCATION SYSTEM (PVT.) LTD.

Section 10 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Section 4 Holiday Application for Defense of Leave Exemption The Impact Bank claimed that the notice was published on 19 6 2008 and petitioner 2 was filed on 8 2008. Therefore, it was banned. The defendant at the time pleaded that the limit was imposed under section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1908, and the checks which were insulted were re-issued and the date of final payment is still pending. Closed because of This period had to be excluded for the counting of the delimitation as provided under section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1908, therefore, the application for leave to defend this case was within time and before the date of payment. There was a question of law and facts regarding filing a case and whether the installments were paid or not to be investigated.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009

• SARAH A. WASTI v. KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION through Director 2009 YLR 1358
• AL-MAL SECURITIES AND SERVICES LTD. v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN through Joint Director, Securities Market Division 2009 CLD 1358
• EDWARD HENRY LOUIS v. Dr. MUTAMMAD SAFDAR 2009 PCrLJ 1359
• TARIQ HABIB v. State 2009 YLR 1364
• Haji BASHIR AHMED BABBAR v. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION NORTHERN JAMRAO DIVISION MIRPURKHAS, SINDH 2009 MLD 1368
• KHALID MEHMOOD v. State 2009 YLR 1370
• Dr. MUHAMMAD ASLAM SIDDIQUI v. CITY DISTRICT GOVERNMENT, KARACHI 2009 YLR 1374
• NIAZ HUSSAIN v. State 2009 PCrLJ 1376

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2009 →

pakistani advocates Thatta lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes