Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SAEED versus INDICO PAIN COLOUR AND VARNISH CO

Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 Section 12 (2) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979), Section 13 challenging the validity of the order on the tenant's request, the lawyer for the tenant wrote in writing that the tenant Intends to withdraw the appeal. After a year and two months, he should be allowed to vacate the house in dispute. The offer made by the tenant on behalf of the tenant was accepted by the landlord and the appellate court challenged the challenge order approved by the appellate court. The court on the grounds that fraud or misrepresentation was committed in pursuance of a court order because they did not allow their lawyer to make a statement to withdraw the appeal and alleged that his lawyer appealed. I have lied and lied about making false statements. By agreeing to the agreement on behalf of his client (the tenant), it was impractical for the tenant to consider any fraud on the record, or to talk to the opposing party in any way. There was discussion, but nothing was on record to suggest that a false statement was made by the lawyer agreeing to the appellate court's contentious consent order, otherwise the settlement was not unilateral but the tenant had a greater benefit. According to the agreement, a year and two months was given to the tenant to occupy the house in dispute. S applicants / tenants have failed to prove evidence of alleged fraud or wrong against getting a court order, section 12 (2), PC, PC Filed under tenant application has been deleted us immigration advocates from Kotmomin lawyer