Find a Lawyer

ABRAR ARMED versus SHEIKH ZAHOOR AHMED

Section 20 and O XXXVII, R1 Recovery After filing a written statement due to an irrevocable Czech territorial jurisdiction, the defendant neither appeared in court nor any evidence in support of his pursuit of the written statement. Presented one of which raised an objection. The defendant in his written statement had to contend with the trial court's territorial jurisdiction that since the matter had occurred on M, therefore, the place was not maintained at K, the plaintiff prepared the original check and supported his claim. I think his memorandum suit was based on a negotiating device and the assumption was that he was against the issue and did not come forward to refute the defendant's position, and the contents of the affidavit were blunt. And were irrelevant even though the defendant had filed a written statement but could not do so. The evidence to be considered as the defendant did not lead to any evidence In the absence of any kind the request made by the defendant in his written statement could not be considered as dishonesty in place of the check K And therefore the cause of action was imposed on KK, therefore, according to Section 20, a CPC case may be filed where the defendant resided or was the cause of action. Arjun suit was ordered accordingly list of supreme court advocates from Shaheed Benazirabad lawyer