Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE KHAN versus SARDAR MUHAMMAD AKBAR KHAN

Section 21 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Section 148 and O XX, R 14 Pre-Impression Suit, in the injunction the plaintiff is directed to specify the amount of the purchase as well as the sale price on or on the specified date. Submit before, otherwise this matter will be considered. The plaintiff's request has been rejected which is for extension of the period filed in such date / end date. Such order was final on automatic operation. After the court passed the final order, the issue was stopped. And the plaintiff was not prosecuted. The question relating to the reason for the non-submission of such amount within the stipulated time shall be irrelevant in such case, as provided under section 148 clause.

Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2013

• MUHAMMAD TASLEEM v. The STATE through Advocate-General, AJ&K 2013 YLR 394
• Ch. MAQBOOL RAZA v. ASHFAQ AHMED 2013 YLR 407
• MUHAMMAD SADIQ BHATTI v. MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ 2013 PCrLJ 462
• DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE v. NEELUM JHELUM HYDRO POWER COMPANY (PVT.) LTD. 2013 PTD 513
• MUHAMMAD RIAZ v. The STATE through Advocate-General Azad Jammu and Kashmir 2013 PCrLJ 532
• MUHAMMAD LUQMAN v. MUHAMMAD ARIF QURESHI 2013 CLC 548
• ATTIQUE AHMED v. ADLA NOREEN 2013 CLC 568
• ADNAN GHULAM RASOOL v. NOSHEEN QURESHI 2013 PLC(CS) 587

All Supreme Court Azad Kashmir judgments of 2013 →

best law firm from Battagram lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes