Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IDREES versus MUHAMMAD KASHIF

Appeal for leave to defend dismissal of suit application for recovery of money on the basis of A. IX, R 13, O XXXVII, Rr 2, 3 and O XLIII, R 1 (c) Pro Note appeared before the trial court. And filed a petition seeking leave from the court to defend the case. Neither defendant nor his lawyer appeared on the date of the hearing adjourned, the trial court not only dismissed the petition seeking leave to defend the case, but also declared the case ex parte. If the previous order had been approved, the matter would have been settled before the court to hear the interim application for leave to defend the case and the court would only dismiss the application and proceed only on the interim application act of the court. Could be banned. The case was illegal when the defendant, in submitting an application for separation of the previous order, was agitated by the contentious fact in the application which required the rector. Ding of evidence and correction and briefly rejecting the trial court's order was a violation of the principles of natural justice when once a dispute over a controversial order was uprooted on a question of law and fact. , The trial court was bound to provide the parties with an opportunity to guide the supportive and contradictory evidence, and the trial order was set aside and the trial court remanded to the trial court in order to address the shortcomings raised in the petitions. May have the opportunity to present supportive and contradictory evidence. To put aside the previous party decree immigration advocates contact from Samundri lawyer