Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AKBAR versus PAKISTAN THROUGH MILITARY ESTATE OFFICER

A. IX, R 8 Demarcation Act (IX of 1908), application for the recovery of a dismissal case for delay in section 5 unlawful prosecution, the plaintiff was requested not to appear before the lawyer for the cause of the illness. In the event the court should have issued notice to them. The plaintiff was obliged to follow it with the restriction of the matter and could not pass the matter on to anyone else, including the court, the plaintiff did not show any reasonable cause or explained the delay of each day. When the plaintiff's application was dismissed in the circumstances.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014

• NAMA LIKA SILK INDUSTRIES v. ULTIMATE DRIVING MACHINE 2014 PLD 100
• SHAFI MUHAMMAD BANGWAR v. State 2014 PCrLJ 105
• SAEED ALAM v. FAMILY JUDGE, ROHRI 2014 YLR 105
• ABDUL WAHAB KHOSO v. YOUSUF TUNIO 2014 MLD 111
• Mst. NAEEMA JEHAN v. Mst. AKBARI 2014 YLR 116
• SHABBIR TILES AND CERAMICS LABOUR UNION v. REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS 2014 PLC 117
• ASADULLAH v. State 2014 MLD 121
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN v. State 2014 PCrLJ 125

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2014 →

us immigration advocates from Bhirya Road lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes