Find a Lawyer

SIRAJ DIN versus RAJADA

In section 5 civil code of conduct (v. 1908), two separate injunctions were prepared in both suits 96 and 115, and the memorandum of appeal covered both the cases, and the orders filed in only one case passed the appeal. And the case was dropped in the meantime. During the appeal hearing, the parties were aware of the fact that there was no order or no formal separate appeal in connection with a suit was formally submitted with the request under Section 5. The Act, 1908, the District Judge, in the Appeal and the High Court, refused to delay the amendment and dismissed the appeal filed before the District Judge, which showed that the decision was challenged in both cases. Was. And this was not an appeal in one case, nor a copy of the suit sheet of a suit in another case, but not the other, and if there were corrective actions taken by examining the appeal memorandum in the phase and The appellants were asked to file a copy of the decree and decision in another civil suit in order to further strengthen the joint strike, which would not have resulted in such dishonesty. In part, the court and its workers and parties should have been well aware that if properly attended to immediately by the District Judge, all such technical failures could be resolved, even at the point of argument. This decision should be postponed to delay and after allowing the opportunity. The parties to the same file and there was no question about the remedy for this appeal law firms from Kohat lawyer