Step 1 of 8
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Latest Judgments (All Jurisdictions within Pakistan)
Messrs LIBERTY MILLS LIMITED through Authorised Director and 8 others vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Finance and 5 others
Summary: Summary pending
GHULAM RASOOL alias GUDDA vs The STATE
Summary: Summary pending
Present: Ejaz Afzal Khan Dost Muhammad Khan and Ijaz ul Ahsan JJ SIRAJ AHMED through LRs vs FAYSAL BANK LIMITED and others
Summary: Summary pending
SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED TO MESSRS JCR VIS CREDIT RATING COMPANY LIMITED FOR ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SECTION OF THE COMPETITION ACT IN THE MATTEROF
Summary: Summary pending.
SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED TO PAKISTAN BAHRIA TOWN PVT LIMITED IN THE MATTER OF
Summary: Summary pending.
MOLVI MUHAMMADIN VS MUHAMMAD BACHAL
Summary: Summary pending.
OGDCL VS M/s Excel Techno Solutions FZE, etc.
Summary: Summary Pending
State Vs Zahoor-ur-Rehman
Summary: Plea of alibi of an accused would not entitle co-accused for grant of bail.The expression further inquiry isnot to be taken lightly.
Irfan Younas Vs Akhtar Ali
Summary: Rent Controller, exercising power under section 13(6) of Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 to determine finally the rent due to the tenant and to direct to be given to the land lord on the conclusion of trial.
MUHAMMAD SAEED VS ADJ ETC
Summary: The court carefully examined the record and noted that the lower courts' findings varied regarding the recovery of dowry articles and deferred dower. The Family Court decreed the respondent's (the wife's) suit for recovery of dowry articles but dismissed her claim for maintenance allowance and deferred dower. Subsequently, the District Judge modified the judgment and decreed the respondent's right to dowry articles and deferred dower in part, resulting in conflicting conclusions.The court observed that the wife's claim for maintenance allowance and recovery of deferred dower was not supported by cogent and confidence-inspiring evidence. Additionally, it noted that the wife's own statement in her examination-in-chief did not provide clarity on certain aspects of the case. The husband had sought restitution of conjugal rights, demonstrating his willingness to reconcile, but the wife had pursued divorce through Khula. This context led the court to uphold the Family Court's decision to deny maintenance allowance.Regarding deferred dower and dowry articles, the court found the wife's evidence insufficient to prove that the husband had taken these items from her. The husband's statement indicated that the wife had taken away a portion of her gold ornaments when she left the matrimonial home. As there was no compelling evidence that the husband possessed these items, the court upheld the Family Court's findings in this regard.However, concerning dowry articles, the court recognized that the wife was entitled to recover them or their equivalent value as specified in her list. The judgment concluded by partially allowing the writ petition, denying the wife's claim for dower, and granting her the right to recover dowry articles or their alternative value of Rs.3,00,000, without issuing any costs.