MEHBOOB AHMAD SHAH versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MANSEHRA
Code of Conduct 1908 Section 12 (2) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 The plaintiff asserts that it is joint property and that there is a claim for division of the building on any part of the land. Had no right Patwari's statement ruled that under Section 12 (2), the accused was not a participant in the request for property defense; the trial court, accusing the civil procedure code of fraud and misrepresentation in obtaining the order. Was dismissed, but the appellate court accepted the decision of the appellate court. In the constitutional petition, the order of rejecting the trial court's decision was upheld by the High Court. The leave to appeal to the plaintiff was that he did not obtain the order because of misrepresentation or fraud. I made a statement in it, a trial case between the plaintiff and the defendant. An order has already been filed against the defendant which resulted in the dismissal of the case before the plaintiff. The affected plaintiff requested that Patwari in another case stated that the defendant was a co-participant. As such, it cannot be established on record that the claimant did not claim that the plaintiff could not be considered to have a significant role in obtaining a decree against the plaintiff that the order was forbidden. To be issued against the defendant, therefore, the proper way for the appellate court was to render a decision on the merit of the trial to the extent that the Supreme Court upheld the appellate court's amended order of the High Court. Please remand for this case after the cancellation of the order. Emo related to requests from the parties
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
