Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SHALI versus MUHAMMAD YOUSAF

Civil Procedure Code Order VII, R11 Articles 12 (2) and 115 of CPC Plants O VII denial of validity. In the first case where litigation challenged illegal, illegal, outlawed and reversed. On the basis of the agreement, the sub-registrar canceled the sale process on the basis of such consent order which was earlier filed in the case in which the former registrar had registered that the sale was canceled. The sub-registrar's action in doing so is illegal, illegal, invalid and without jurisdiction. The subsequent case was dismissed and such order was upheld in the appeal. In the latter case, the plaintiff's original objection (the defendant in the first case) was to order a civil court to clear the agreement between the parties, not a separate case based on fraud and misrepresentation. It may be filed for this purpose, and the plaintiff's remedy, if any, was referred to the same court by application under section 12 (2), the CPC's rt theory that the basis of the agreement. But the decision passed by the trial court was not a viable order, there was no relevance to the issue then, because under section 12 (2), the CPC issued not only a decree but an order or The decision can also be challenged to the plaintiff. Subsequently, the purpose of filing the case was clearly to avoid the order passed in the previous case on the basis of the settlement, therefore, such a case was barred under section 12 (2), as in the case C The PC Plaint was rightly rejected by the trial court and the appellate court dismissed it. top civil advocates from Alipur lawyer