Find a Lawyer

SHAFQAT REHMAN versus MST. MAHJABEN

A VII, R 11 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), claiming the petition for refusal of the section 42 suit was that the case was stopped and resumed under the doctrine of race Judeta, Estoppel. The request to do so was accepted. But it was rejected by the appellate court by the trial court challenging the legality of the change based on the fraudulent plaintiffs' fraud, which was a separate cause of action for fraud, Rez Judetta and its limitation record. Can be solved only after doing so. The appellate court's decision and decree of evidence was based on sound reasons and was in accordance with this law. There was no unlawful interference or impairment in this unjustified judgment and decree and the revision was dismissed under the circumstances.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014

• QAMARUDDIN v. GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA through Home Secretary, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Peshawar 2014 PLC(CS) 470
• ABDUL MAJEED CHAUDHRY v. ABDUL HAKEEM SHAH 2014 CLC 473
• Mst. RIAZ BIBI v. MUHAMMAD RIAZ 2014 PCrLJ 475
• AMJAD KHAN v. WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN)\' SECRETARIAT through Secretary, Islamabad 2014 PLC(CS) 476
• MUHAMMAD IBRAR v. State 2014 YLR 482
• GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA v. MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN 2014 YLR 485
• HABIB ULLAH v. MUHAMMAD IQBAL KHAN 2014 CLC 489
• SHAH ZAIB v. State 2014 PCrLJ 494

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2014 →

law firms from Bunner lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes