Home Maxims & Terms Lathes meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Lathes

Lathes legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2009 PLC(CS) 506 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
ApplicabilityScope

Rule of laches being not a rule of universal application, had to be applied to the facts and circumstances of its own case

Principles.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Lathes", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124931172

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Lathes"

SCMR 2001
Civil Appeal No. 84-Q of 1997, decided on 20th September, 2000.

2001 SCMR 363

Haji ALLAH BAKHSH — Appellant Versus ABDULLAH KHAN and 4 others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
MLD 1986
First Rent Appeal No. 1002 of 1982, decided on 3rd April, 1986.

1986 M L D 1674

MUHAMMAD SHAFI‑‑Appellant Versus NIZAM‑UR‑REHMAN SIDDIQUI Respondent

Court: Karachi
CLC 1999
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.83 OF 1997, DECIDED ON 6TH AUGUST, 1998.

1999 C L C 200

MUHAMMAD AZAM AND 5 OTHERS‑‑‑APPELLANTS Versus ABDULLAH AND 15 OTHERS‑‑‑RESPONDENTS .

Court: QUETTA
CLC 1987
Writ Petition No. 15/1) of 1982, decided on 18th May, 1987.

1987 C L C 2121

NAIK LATH KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER REVENUE), D.I. KHAN DIVISION, DERA ISMAIL KHAN and 3 others‑ ‑Respondents

Court: Peshawar
YLR 2003
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 161/M of 2002, decided on 14th October, 2002.

2003 Y L R 3276

MUHAMMAD ARSHAD ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDTIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, SAHIWAL and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1983
Writ Petition No. 29 of 1981, decided on 25th May, 1982.

1983 C L C 647

LAL AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT-Respondent

Court: Azad J & K
SCMR 1993
Civil Appeals Nos. 698‑K and 699‑K of 1990, decided on 23rd May, 1991.

1993 S C M R 1559

MUHAMMAD IQBAL and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus Mst. SAEEDA BANO‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PCRLJ 1991
27th January 1991

1991 P Cr

MUHAMMAD and another — Appellants Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Karachi
PLD 1985
Civil Revision No. 7-A of 1983, decided on 3rd November, 1984. (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

1985Q7

SAHIB DAD-Petitioner Versus INAM AND 4 others — Respondents

Court: -- O. VII, r. 1 (e)-Dasturul Amal Diwani, Kalat, 1952, S. 3 (d)Provisions of O. VII, r. 1 (e) and S. 3 (d), Dasturul Amal Diwani, Kalat, 1952 were in pari mareria-A statement should be made in plaint that cause of action arose on such and such date to enable defendant and Court to ascertain from it whether in fact or in law cause of action did arise as alleged or not and was it within time-Plaint silent about specific allegation (1) when land in suit was given for cultivation to defendant ; (ii) up to what period plaintiffs had received Flaq-i-Malkana from defendant ; (iii) when flood had washed away "lath" and thus when cause of action arose to plaintiff-Plaint, in view of such omissions held, was not entertainable-Plaintiff was obliged to satisfy Court that his suit was not barred by lapse of time and to show when cause of action arose.-Plaint.
PLC(CS) 1996
Appeal No. KAR-11 of 1996, decided on 1st February, 1996.

1996 P L C 677

Messrs PAKISTAN STEEL MILLS CORPORATION LTD., KARACHI Versus TATHIR HUSSAIN SHAH

Court: Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh