Find a Lawyer

KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION versus SAFIULLAH SIDDIQUI

The appearance and absence of the parties to the CPC's Civil Procedure Code Order IX resulted in the O IX R 13 prior decision and decree transferring the case from one court to another, the party notice adviser issued a motion notice The notice was impacted by the defendant's lawyer, but no such service was effective on the defendant's lawyer from time to time adj was adjourned and finally the defendants were also ordered to issue notices and the report of Bailiff. It was also learned that the notice was presented to the defendants, but such notice had no effect on his lawyer; It was declared that the case was adjourned for the recording of its evidence and that the defendant or his lawyer was not present to record the postponement of the postponement of the hearing and to hear the arguments of the plaintiff, before the trial. The party records that the notice of motion in the court was presented at the wrong address of the defendants and that no notice was given to the defendant's lawyer as per the court's direction. The defendants were directed to issue notices and their advisers were of the view that neither the court's motion was ever Team was sent to the defendants nor their lawyers had been served. That they learned of the verdict against them when they received a notice about the implementation of the court-ordered injunction, it can be safely concluded that the plaintiff's original intention, which was also a lawyer himself, was to prosecute the case. The defendant had to be kept in the dark in connection with the transfer. From one court to another and the department sued jobs for advocates from Bahawalpur lawyer