KHERA versus MUHAMMAD SADIQ
0 III, R 4 & 0 V, R 20 Fraud was only attributed to the applicants that the ex parte decree was adopted against the respondents without proper procedure for their service but it was observed That the defendant was represented by a permanent lawyer. Respondents 'service, if any, had a legal impact if respondents' lawyers did not represent them properly, and the applicants were not held liable for the consequences of their negligence. As such there was no fraud by the applicants. Finding out in lower courts that applicants obtained decree through fraud was not sustainable
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
famous supreme court advocate from Ahmed pur Sial lawyer
