Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ISMAIL versus MUKHTAR AHMAD

On the basis of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act 1913 Section 21 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), suit for pre-emption R2 suit, it was contended that the vacancy at the time of the institution suit was trivial and could not be so. Without the help of another friend, the case is set up with qualifications The evidence on the record fully concludes that Wendy did not seriously object to the pre-emptor minority at the time of filing the case because neither Only a claim was made on this subject. None of the vendors nor any evidence was presented to prove the minority of the pursuers, even when the pre-emptor appeared as a witness, it was not suggested by the seller. He was a minor at the time of the trial. No such circumstances were found. Defective representation itself, however, was curable by amending Rule 2 of Case Order and Order XXXII. The CPC did not consider the compulsory dismissal of a case established by a minor without the help of a next friend. The court owns the litigation to hear the case. registration advocate from Phalia lawyer