Articles 6 and 13 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3), for failing the trial to dismiss the case, both the trial court and the appellate court dismissed both on the ground that the petitioner was found guilty and ardent. Has failed to do. Under the High Court, the unanimous decision of the two courts was upheld, in which a non-controversial decision was passed in the review, under which section 13 (3) of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act sent the petitioner's notice to the applicant. There was no record of evidence to prove it. In the absence of the aforesaid notices, 1991, the High Court and the two courts below correctly stated that the applicant failed to prove the student's intent in accordance with the requirements of the law, not reading any misunderstanding or evidence, or any legal or The facts were not indicated in the weakness, as per the requirements of the law between the High Court and the following courts, the present findings of fact regarding the sending of notices to the petitioner, which the High Court has maintained, are incorrect. Despite leaving, no interference was sought by the Supreme Court, for appeal No case for citrus approval was not deleted, the application was dismissed
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
