MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE versus HAMEEDULLAH
O XLI, appeal of the original decree of the CPC Act XLI, R 19, dismissed the appeal for reinstatement of the appeal which was rejected for illegal prosecution. Was transferred and on the same date, a lawyer requested. Appellant appeared and adjourned the hearing for arguments 20 2 to 1984. No one appeared for the appellant on such a deferred date; the appellant's appeal was dismissed before the High Court stating that the counsel appearing for him was not his lawyer and he was not. The joint affidavit was filed by three advisers, two of them claiming to be appellate lawyers, confirming that they had authorized the nominee to appear on their behalf. The third lawyer (the nominee one) signed the joint affidavit council that appeared on behalf of the appellant to sign the joint affidavit even if his affidavit was affidavit. If not treated, it is possible to be treated as a writer that he signed, including his admission.
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
power of attorney advocate Lala rukh lawyer
