Find a Lawyer

SALIMA BEGUM versus MST. SARDARAN BIBI

Civil Procedure Code Order VII (V of 1908), O VII, R1 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) of the Civil Procedure Section 15 of the CPC Plaintiff case for which the defendant's name was claimed. Was entered as a whole. Therefore, on the basis of the evidence to the trial court that the trial body was partially for premature discrimination, it was concluded that there was no bar to unauthorized entry in the name of the respective defendants. Yes, however, the trial court's reversal was found and dismissed on that basis. In the plaintiffs' case, the High Court dismissed the appeal court's hearing and reinstated the trial court's accuracy court, while examining non-compliance with the provisions of OVII, R1, on the content of the plaintiffs as a whole. No consequences have been presented for non-compliance with the provisions. The rules of OVII, R1, CPC are meant to promote justice, and they cannot, according to the courts, be used as an engine of oppression against the party. Not only in favor of the parties' disallowance on technical matters and always prefer good judgment decisions, even if it is considered that the names of the relevant defendants are not actually mentioned in the lawsuit. Mentioning the names of the relevant defendants as the plaintiff will not make any difference. The defendant's claimant was like this, the trial court and the High Court held against all the defendants that the case was not for partial harassment and that the account was not timely barred, in the event of leave of appeal. Was denied. ask a advocate free from Ghazi lawyer