Find a Lawyer

NOORDAD versus MUHAMMAD SADIQ

Section 42 of the Lim42 Act (I 190) of IX, Section 19 suit was sought by the claimant for fraud and concealment of facts by the claimant. The proof of such an application can be resolved only after recording the evidence, but otherwise the principles are not

Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2013

• EASTERN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY through Azhar Qayyum Managing Director v. AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary 2013 YLR 1605
• SAJIDA MAQSOOD v. AZAD GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary 2013 YLR 1713
• AYAZ AHMED v. SHAMIM AKHTER 2013 MLD 1897
• AZIZULLAH v. MITTHA 2013 YLR 2000
• AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR v. MUHAMMAD ABBAS KHAN KHATAK 2013 PLD 1
• RABIA AKHTER v. MUHAMMAD AYUB 2013 MLD 16
• MUHAMMAD AZAM v. KHALID MEHMOOD 2013 PCrLJ 36
• ISRAR QURESHI v. Mst. ZAINAB BIBI 2013 YLR 59

All Supreme Court Azad Kashmir judgments of 2013 →

advocate from Jaja Abasian lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes