Find a Lawyer

MANZOOR AHMAD versus GHULAM HASSAN

AXXVI, R9 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), the scope suit for the appointment of a local commission to section 42 suit was dismissed by the trial court where an appeal was filed in which the defendants moved the application for the appointment of a local commission. That was dismissed moved after 10/2 years for the appointment of the local commission after the department suit, any such application before the trial court's request for a local commission appointment under the trial case. Was not inserted because such intervals cannot be allowed. The litigation will go on for a long time The plaintiff was obliged to prove his possession by presenting the evidence which was already listed and the appellate court was now occupied in the matter under which the appointment of a local commission was made by the court. And no party could have asked for such an appointment to produce evidence. There was no illegal identification of illegality in its favor

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014

• TARIQ SAEED v. State 2014 MLD 1561
• Ms. FARRAH NOOR v. State 2014 PTD 1563
• MUHAMMAD ISHAQ v. MUHAMMAD HAYAT 2014 MLD 1564
• MUHAMMAD AFZAL v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, Faisalabad 2014 YLR 1569
• NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY v. PROVINCE OF PUNJAB 2014 CLC 1578
• MUHAMMAD RAFIQ v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1578
• MUHAMMAD SHAFI v. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE 2014 MLD 1579
• GHULAM MUSTAFA v. COMMISSIONER/DELIMITATION AUTHORITY, D.G. KHAN DIVISION, DERA GHAZI KHAN 2014 YLR 1583

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2014 →

attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Jampur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes