Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ESSA versus DISTRICT JUDGE, PISHIN

O VI, R 17 Constitution Pakistan, Request for amendment of the case for the amendment of the notice case was rejected before the constitution request, but it was accepted by the trial court. The defendant's validity argument was that the review was approved by the court. There was no jurisdiction to pass the created order. As the subject matter was Rs. Was not valid, because the suit quote on the suit property would change the color of the sale protection. The plaintiff never disagreed with the sale price and the ambiguous amendment could not be sought and the controversial amendment could be approved and re-probate. The impugned order was illegal, illegal and was granted without any jurisdiction. Annie application was accepted, as was set aside and the application to amend the claimant was dismissed cases

Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2014

• SHAAN SHER TAREEN v. REGISTRAR, ALLAMA IQBAL OPEN UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD 2014 PLC(CS) 1138
• INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES AND PRACTICES, QUETTA v. GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN, SECRETARY LAND UTILIZATION/SENIOR MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE, QUETTA 2014 CLC 1211
• ABDUL HALEEM v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1218
• REGISTRAR, HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN, QUETTA v. MAZAR KHAN 2014 PLC(CS) 1275
• GHULAM QADIR v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1366
• HAIDER ALI KHAN JAMALI v. RETURNING OFFICER/ADC JAFFARABAD 2014 CLC 1381
• YAR MUHAMMAD v. PROVINCIAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, BALOCHISTAN 2014 CLC 1433
• Syed PERVEZ MUSHARRAF v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1434

All Quetta High Court Balochistan judgments of 2014 →

divorce advocates from Kandiaro lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes