A. VIII, R 11 KP Pre-Impression Act (X of 1987), Sections 13, 31 and 5 have been filed before pretrial arrest for the dismissal of the plaintiff in which the defendant filed the O. VII. Has moved the application under Rule 11, CPC. The lawsuit, which was withheld by the law, was that the umpire had failed to submit 1/3 of the premature costs and the illegal transaction was canceled. The application was accepted simultaneously, which led to the dismissal of the limitation suit, but the two courts did not attend the remaining two grounds in the application below, which was not in the record, The statements made were recorded but neither the recording of this change nor the recording of such statements were sufficient to cease the sale process which requires confirmation by the Revenue Officer in the form of an order. Both courts acted illegally during computing. The reconsideration was accepted and the above orders of the two courts were set aside and the trial was remanded to the trial court with a view to seeing that the sale was completed and on the remaining grounds Action has been taken. Application should be considered
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014
