Find a Lawyer

FARRUKH MUNIR versus PAKISTAN HOUSING AUTHORITY THROUGH AUTHORIZED ATTORNEY

Section 54 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O XXXIX, Rr 1 & 2 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Petition The plaintiff filed a scheme for the construction of apartments in a project The plaintiffs and the plaintiffs purchased the apartments in the said project The plaintiffs' claim was a plan as advertised, under a master plan that included Parks, and other facilities and defendants obliged to do so in accordance with their letter and spirit. And could not deviate, but the defendant did not follow the plan. The plaintiff asserted that the components for the injunction were in favor of the trial court granted the concessionaire relief for the plaintiff as he prayed, but the appeals court below ruled against the trial court's reversal. After the plaintiffs filed a constitutional petition, the parties have different viewpoints on the master plan dispute, the site plan case needs to be reviewed by evidence and detailed investigation, where both parties are important. The evidence should provide an opportunity to prove your own position, was disciplinary relief, and depend on it. Three components; the first case is a balance of convenience; and irreparable damage In the present case, if the construction of apartments was stopped in the scheme, it was bound to hurt potential buyers who had paid and suffered delays. The balance of the facility will be in favor of the defendant and not. There was no possibility of any irreparable harm in favor of the plaintiffs because they were not us immigration advocates from Kamra lawyer