Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

ASLAM KHAN KHATTAK versus PAKISTAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION


O XLI, r 23 was read with orders 23 and 25 of remand, which the lower appellate court of remand passed, which does not fall under 23 nor is it under 25 and the justification is only under 23. The lower appellate court does not show grounds for reversing the trial court's order. And such instructions as may be obeyed by all parties to agree to the recall of the remand order and some evidence relating to the decision of the case and some evidence related to the decision of the case between the parties under the law. Arrived and remand order has been separated. And the District Judge (Lower Appellate Court) has been instructed to decide the case on its own or submit it to the present evidence to any Additional District Judge and follow the directions.

1981 C L C 1414

[Lahore]

Before Khurshid Ahmnd, J

ASLAM KHAN KHATTAK AND OTHERS Petitioners

versus

PAKISTAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION

AND OTHERS‑Respondents

First Appeal from Original Order No. 83 of 1980, decided on 16th November, 1980:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 19118)‑---

‑‑ O‑ XLI, r. 23‑A read with rr. 23 & 25‑Remand .‑Order of re mand passed by lower appellate Court neither falling under r. 23 nor under r. 25 and justifiable only under r. 23‑A‑Lower appellate Court not showing sufficient grounds for reversing decree of trial Court and directives given by it such as could be complied with by itself‑All parties to case agreeing to recall of order of remand and decision of case on existing evidence ‑‑subject to certain conditions and arrangement arrived at between parties in conformity with law‑Order of remand set aside and District Judge (lower appellate Court) directed to decide case either by himself or entrust same to any Additional District Judge on existing evidence and to comply with directives.

Ch. Muhammad Farooq for Appellant.

Irshad Hassan, Dy. Attorney‑General for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.

Bashir Ahmed for Respondents Nos. 4 to 9 and 11 to 13.

Respondent No. 10 : Ex parte.

Date of hearing: 16th November, 1980.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
law websites from Pir Mahal lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.