Find a Lawyer

S.M. CORPORATION LIMITED versus NEW ERA TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED

In the first case, the CPC Frame's Civil Procedure Code Order II, R2 estoppel-proof plant, was returned to the plaintiff for submission to the competent court because the court lacked the legal jurisdiction and the plaintiff It then asserted that the plaintiff objected that the present case, which was based on the same cause of action, had come under Stoepel's view because the provisions of O11, R2, CPC were attracted. The plaintiff asserts that the reasons for the proceedings of the previous lawsuit and the current lawsuit are different and different from those required by the plaintiff. O11, R2, enables the plaintiff to take other steps to include or deny necessary evidence in its written statement as a special application bar under the CPC, failing to do so as well His competitor failed to include any evidence to support the case. Thus the plaintiff was not affected by Estoppel's [estoppel] doctrine. best advocate from Topi lawyer