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)
MUHAMMAD AALAM VS MEHMOOD KHAN
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD YOUNAS VS MEMBER BOARD OF EVENUE PUNJABLAHORE
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD AMIN VS MST SHAISTA
Summary: Summary pending.
SHAH MUHAMMAD VS ABDUL SAMAD
Summary: Summary pending.
MST HUSSAN BIBI VS GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA THROUGH COLLECTOR MACDAN
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD SAJJAD VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
A IHSAN ELECTRONICS VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN TRADING LLC
Summary: Summary pending.
Mst. Hussan Bibi vs Govt.
Summary: S.18 Land Acquisition Act,S.151,O.XLI,R-33 CPC:Same benefit of compensation to all landowners even non objected or filled reference
Muhammad Amin vs Mst shaista
Summary: S.17,48,49 Registration Act:Validity of oral & non registered gift
Shah Muhammad and 3 others V. Abdul Samad and 6 others,
Summary: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. XIV, Rr. 1, 3 & 5---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.42---Suit for declaration---Issue,framing of---Scope---Pleadings were not perused with diligent application of mind by the TrialCourt---Issue with regard to the validity of impugned mutation was not framed and parties hadfailed to substantiate their claims by producing evidence---Provisions of O.XIV, Rr.1, 3 & 5,C.P.C. were ignored and findings recorded by the courts below were lacking the determinationon the points of real controversy between the parties---Trial Court was bound to frame properissues which had not been done and principal question of facts remained unattended---Judgmentsand decrees of both the courts below suffered from material irregularities and illegalities---Suitland prior to impugned mutation was not owned by the owners in their independent and jointcapacity rather same was Shamilat Deh---Patadaran of Shamilat Deh were required to beimpleaded as a party who were not impleaded as a party in the present case---Impugnedjudgments and decrees passed by the courts below were not sustainable which were set aside andcase was remanded to the Trial Court for decision afresh in accordance with law---Revision wasaccepted in circumstances.Mst. Rasheeda Bibi v. Mukhtar Ahmed 2008 SCMR 1384 and Khalique Ahmed v. AbdulGhani PLD 1973 SC 214 rel.