Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AZAD versus MALIK ZAHOOR

A. XXXVII, the trial court accepted the request subject to a bank guarantee to apply for a suit, leave to appear and defense on a check-based basis, and the defendant to appear and defend the case. Bank Guarantee, the antitrust defendant's claim, challenged the condition imposed in an unidentified order in which a direct attachment of a conditional or unconditional leave could result in the accuracy, final success or failure of the case, Refusal or leave approval was not considered. Instead, it was considered that the grounds laid down in the petition for permission to defend the case were debatable between the plaintiffs and the defendants. Recognizing his responsibility for the money claimed against him, the defendant has already received enough money through an agreement to hand over the possession of the house to him by the jirga (contract). Given that, when he was in possession of the land, he was also leased due to land demarcation, which was not the default. With regard to either party, it cannot be said that the terms of the jirga were not fulfilled, the trial court sought to defend and defend the trial court on the condition of presenting a bank guarantee. The exercise of discretion in allowing, did not face any weakness. , In the circumstances of the case advocates from Sehwan lawyer