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)
Mosam Khan vs Gul Muhammad
Summary: S.13 Pre-emption Act:Requirements of Talabs (Talb-e-muwathibat & ishhad)
MANZOOR ELLAHI QURESHI THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS VS MUHAMMAD BILAL ABBAS
Summary: Summary pending.
MANZOOR ELLAHI QURESHI THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS VS MUHAMMAD BILAL ABBAS
Summary: Summary pending.
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN OTHERSS VS MESSRS M FAHEEM HAIDER COMPANY THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE OKARA
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD SHAHAB VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INDUSTRY QUETTA BALOCHISTAN THROUGH DEPUTY SECRETARY VS DIRECTOR GENERAL QUETTA DEVELOPMENTAUTHORYT
Summary: Summary pending.
LAL ZAMIN ALIAS LALONO ZARGAR VS ASFYAR KHAN
Summary: Summary pending.
SHAKIL MEHMOOD THROUGH SPECIAL ATTORNEY VS DISTRICT JUDGE SIALKOT
Summary: Summary pending.
SHAKIL MEHMOOD VS DIST. JUDGE
Summary: West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-------S.5 &Sched.---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Recovery of dower, dowry articles, maintenance allowance and delivery expenses---Concurrent findings of Trial Court and Appellate Court by which decree for maintenancefor son, recovery of dower amount and dowry articles was passed in favour of the wife(respondent)---Husband (petitioner) in his petition did not challenge the quantam ofmaintenance allowance as fixed by courts below but objected to the 20% annual increasein the said allowance---Husband also contented that dowry list was not signed by him orhis representative and list of dowry articles exhibited in the court did not mention theirprices---Validity---Petitioner had failed to produce his salary slips to establish hiscontention that 20% annual increase in maintenance allowance was beyond his means---Minor son was a 'special child' because of which wife had to incur a lot of expense onhis medical treatment---Such fact was also admitted by one of petitioner's witnesses, inview of which 20% annual increase in maintenance allowance was rightly fixed by courtsbelow---Wife had proved the list of dowry articles, as the same was signed by her andshe had also produced different receipts regarding the purchase of said dowry articles---Husband having failed to point out any illegality or irregularity in concurrent findings ofTrial Court and Appellate Court below, his petition was dismissed. Tauqeer Ahmad Qureshi v. Additional District Judge, Lahore and 2 others PLD2009 SC 760 distinguished.
Muhammad Rasool vs Aslam Khan
Summary: S.8,9,20 Pre-emption Act:Property is to be distributed equally