In the Civil Code of Civil Procedure (v. 1908), during the proceedings of section 47, the creditors of the lawsuit, Judge Judge, petitioned the Executive Court for a fresh determination of the shares, on the claim that the plaintiff and his His father's third brother, who died on the grounds of an unlawful verdict, failed to make such a request in a written statement or before the prosecution, so he did not take such a request during the execution. Because such a request was not brought before the trial court and the decree was finalized, Could not extend its jurisdiction. Go after the decree except where the order was a matter of restraint but it was quietly but under Section 47, CPC, the Court of Applicants may consider the decision so as to determine the satisfaction of the decree. The property brought in is for the decision-makers, but may not entertain a dispute request that may alter and alter the terms and conditions of participation in the decree, so that the URT cannot be reversed. Nor was it a jurisdiction to reassign the responsibility of a party or to re-establish the purpose. R to review the High Court refused to intervene in the following order and decisions by the courts, the legal framework was not committed any irregularity or material error. Revision rejected in circumstances
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014
