Find a Lawyer

MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED versus M.M. TRADERS

Banking Companies (Debt Recovery) Ordinance 1979 Section 12 Civil Procedure Code (V8 1908), O XIII, RR 1, 2, O VIII, Rr 1, 2, O XVIII, R 17 and O XII, Rr 2, 3 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional application Inter-court orders Special Court Banking refused to present the defendant's document on the basis that the order to reject the interim orders on the first date of hearing justified the constitutional jurisdiction. Question about constitutional jurisdiction over interference with mutual orders in the constitutional jurisdiction is not related to the jurisdiction of the court because the constitutional jurisdiction has The injunction cannot be considered a restriction but it will only be examined by the court for any matter relating to arbitrary conduct. Its merits and court should conclude whether it would like to use its discretion to interfere with the facts and circumstances of each case. In connection with the preparation of documentary evidence, the defendant was discriminated against by the Banking Court while the plaintiff's documentary evidence was obtained with the evidence and despite the defendant's objection, it was admitted that the evidence could not be obtained. While the defendant was not allowed to present and present his documentary evidence. On the first date of the hearing, there was no good reason for the non-production of the Rule 8, CPC, as it applied to the defendant, there was nothing in the provision of the law which I needed the defendant to set a good cause. Prior to the non-production of the documents while the court's authority was that the defendant should have documented evidence. female advocates from Gojra lawyer