Find a Lawyer

JAMAL KHAN versus MIAN KHAN

Sections 5, 14 and Arts 152 and 155 of the Courts Fee Act (VII of 1870), Section 7 (v) (a) before the wrongful appeal of the wrong appeal, before the judgment passed by the civil court on 8 before 12 2000 Appeal for approval of regular hearing and stay order by the High Court instead of filing an appeal to the High Court on 6 1, 2001, for wrongful evaluation of the case for jurisdiction and judicial fees before the judgment. With the return of the appeal on 2001, the High Court applied for certified copies on the defendant's objection to the District Judge Appellant on 25-22, 2002, which passed it on 14/2002 to the District Judge. The appeal court was ready to file. The request for a delayed settlement as well as such assessment as stated in the Improved Directive Sheet was Rs 25,000, but the appellant has misunderstood that the appellant has been using this from time to time. It should be decided according to thought. Prior to 01 August 24 1 2002, the High Court had erroneously and in good faith explained the appellant's delay to each and the delay in filing the appeal was waived in the circumstances. \ R \ n top advocates from Panjgur lawyer