Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY versus MUMTAZ AHMED TARAR

Article 22 Constitution Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Application Transfer Order The applicant was returned to the applicant for issuance of the surplus and, during the hearing of the election petition, the request to furnish his additional number was removed by the Election Tribunal endorsement. Which was already chosen by the framework. The Election Tribunal also allowed the Tribunal decision regarding the previous election dispute between the returning candidates and some other political opponents in relation to the default issues to be placed on the Election Tribunal as well as the Supreme Court record decision. There are ways to get reservations. It was not necessary for the court to set up an additional matter in its defense, nor did the dispute between the parties require a complete and decisive decision. The High Court refused to intervene in the order passed by the Election Tribunal.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014

• LIAQAT ALI v. State 2014 YLR 646
• MUHAMMAD TARIQ v. State 2014 PCrLJ 647
• GENERAL MANAGER, NHA, MULTAN v. MUHAMMAD AQEEL AHMEDANI 2014 CLD 648
• ZAFAR IQBAL v. CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF GOVERNORS, CADET COLLEGE, OKARA 2014 CLC 648
• MUHAMMAD AKRAM v. State 2014 PCrLJ 653
• ALLAH DITTA v. State 2014 PCrLJ 658
• Dr. NAZEER SAEED v. MUHAMMAD JAVED 2014 PLD 660
• ZAHID MEHMOOD v. REGIONAL MANAGER UTILITY STORES, FAISALABAD 2014 MLD 661

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2014 →

list of supreme court advocates from Leepa lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes