MST. WAHIDAN versus MST. RAFIQAN BEGUM
In the Civil Procedure Code Order XX and Decree OXX of the CPC Decision, the parties for possession of the R12 suit and Mason's profits, the relevant plaintiff seized a quarter, which the plaintiff had acquired either The quarter belonging to the claimant was to be vacated or to pay Rs.3,000 but he failed to perform any of the two responsibilities. The trial court acquitted the appellate court in favor of the possession of the plaintiff appellate court. And Mason passed a decree for profit and allowed a sum of Rs. 3 (X10 to the plaintiff), the money allegedly spent by his claimant. Appeal Court down the challenged order in the second appeal, for equitable and appropriate reasons, dismissing the interference in the second appeal
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
online advocate from Kotli Loharan lawyer
