Qanuni Amdad urdu

So, in this case at the Lahore High Court, the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) challenged a judgment favoring Khan Agha and others. The case revolved around citizenship rights related to obtaining CNIC and Passports. The court overturned a previous decision, leading to the appointment of Amici Curiae to address legal complexities. The judgment highlighted the importance of special laws governing these matters. JUDGMENT SHEET LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT C. R. No. 21451 of 2023 National Database and Registration Authority VERSUS Khan Agha and six others JUDGMENT Date of Hearing 13.06.2024 Petitioner By: Mr. Jamil Khan, Advocate Respondents By: M/s Shahanshah Shamil Paracha, Malik  Muhammad Rashid Akash and Ali Asghar Mian, Advocates Assisted By: Mr. Munawar-us-Salam ASC and Mr. Imran  Aziz Khan, ASC as Amici Curiae ABID HUSSAIN CHATTHA, J. This Civil Revision is preferred by the  Petitioner / National Database and Registration Authority (the “NADRA”

2023 CLC 702 A reading of  provision of S.145 CPC  clearly reflects that when a person becomes surety for performance of any decree or its part, or restitution of any property taken in execution of decree or payment of any money under an order of the Court in any suit or proceedings, the decree can be executed against him, to the extent for which surety has rendered himself personally liable in the manners, therein. The provision of Section 145 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) holds significance in the legal landscape concerning surety in court decrees. When an individual assumes the role of a surety for the execution of a decree, they willingly accept responsibility for ensuring the performance of the decree, return of any property obtained through the decree, or payment of any monetary obligations mandated by the court. This provision emphasizes that the decree can be enforced against the surety personally to the extent of their liability as outlined in the agreement. Essentially, b

The wife filed for divorce, withdrew it, then claimed fraud. Courts set aside the order, dissolved the marriage for justice. wife in Sindh, Pakistan. The wife filed a suit to dissolve their marriage, but she later withdrew it in the Family Court. However, she didn't give up. She made an application under Section 12(2) of the Civil Procedure Code, claiming fraud and misrepresentation. The Family Court and the Lower Appellate Court, understanding the gravity of the situation, set aside the previous order and dissolved the marriage. The husband argued that the Family Court didn't have the jurisdiction to do so under Section 12(2) of the C.P.C. However, the courts emphasized that when there is a need to correct a fraudulent order, technicalities shouldn't stand in the way of real justice. They believed in granting substantial justice to the genuine litigant, focusing on the essence of the application and the plea made. In the end, it was concluded that the lower courts acted co