A. VIII, R2 and OIX, R13 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Proceedings of the Ex parte Decree for the Acquisition of Section 5 Suits Requests for Determination of the Ex parte Decree, Delay of Punishment and Execution Appellant / Defendant was dismissed for suspension The lawyer once appeared before the trial court, and then neither the appellant / defendant nor his lawyer filed the original lawyer's attorney and written statement. Therefore, the previous action against the appellant was initiated that the appellant's confession was that he had no personal services. This did not have the effect, nor was the alternative services adopted in a regular way, which was published in the daily newspaper, which was not a widely circulated paper; The defendant was aware, but he was hiding the truth from the trial court and neither the appellant had given the person the option to appear before the trial by the court or by the advocate. Were signed by. It was legitimate for the appellant that he was not served, as it was published in a daily newspaper, which was not a widely circulated paper, due to the departure of the presiding officer, note. Reader was adjourned till 2 5 2009, when the trial court initiated the proceedings against the appellant, then the case was adjourned on the note reader, which was not the date of the hearing. Given a postponed date, which was not a valid order, the appellant specifically did this
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014
