Home Maxims & Terms Deceiving by respondent meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Deceiving by respondent

Deceiving by respondent legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2014 CLD 257 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S. 33Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5AppealCondonation of delayDeceiving by respondentEffectConsumer filed appeal against decision of Trial Court beyond period of limitation

Consumer sought condonation of delay on the ground that after decision of Trial Court, respondent-company approached him and promised that he would be compensated by providing 250 bags of seed of maize and thus they deceived consumer and let the limitation period expire

Validity

Explanation extended by consumer in order to seek condonation of delay caused in filing of appeal did not appeal to sense and such plea had never been recognized as justification for condonation of delay in filing of some legal proceedings

High Court declined to condone delay, as consumer failed to justify delayed filing of appeal

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

2014 CLC 154 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S. 33Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5AppealCondonation of delayDeceiving by respondentEffectConsumer filed appeal against decision of Trial Court beyond period of limitation

Consumer sought condonation of delay on the ground that after decision of Trial Court, respondent-company approached him and promised that he would be compensated by providing 250 bags of seed of maize and thus they deceived consumer and let the limitation period expire

Validity

Explanation extended by consumer in order to seek condonation of delay caused in filing of appeal did not appeal to sense and such plea had never been recognized as justification for condonation of delay in filing of some legal proceedings

High Court declined to condone delay, as consumer failed to justify delayed filing of appeal

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Deceiving by respondent", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124944559

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Deceiving by respondent"

CLD 2014
2013-August-5

2014 C L D 257

MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Appellant Versus GENERAL MANAGER PIONEER PAKISTAN SEED LIMITED, LAHORE and 4 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 2014
2013-August-5

2014 C L C 154

MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Appellant Versus GENERAL MANAGER PIONEER PAKISTAN SEED LIMITED, LAHORE and 4 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 2017
2016-June-29

P L D 2017 Balochistan 22

BIBI HUMERA — Petitioner Versus GHULAM DASTAGIR and 3 others — Respondents

Court: High Court
MLD 1989
Miscellaneous Appeal No.1 of 1988, decided on 30th May, 1988.

1989 M L D 1137

NATIONAL DETERGENTS LIMITED‑‑Appellant Versus ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS‑II‑‑Respondent

Court: Karachi
CLD 2009
2009-March-30

2009 C L D 1005

Messrs NATIONAL TOOLS INDUSTRIES (REGD.) through Managing Partner — Appellant Versus Messrs AZHAR ENTERPRISES through Proprietor — Respondent

Court: Lahore
PLD 1959
Criminal Appeal No. 212 of 1958, decided on 3rd March 1959.

P L D 1959 (W

MUHAMMAD RASHID‑Convict‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Court:
PLD 1983
Suit No. 65 of 1980, decided on 29th March, 1982.

P L D 1983 Karachi 357

MESSRS BURNEY'S INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL Co. LTD.-Plaintiff Versus MESSRS REHMAN MATCH WORKS-Defendant

Court:
SCMR 1989
Civil Appeal. 84-K of 1986, decided on 22nd September, 1988.

1989SCMR361

FORMICA CORPORATION — Appellant Versus PAKISTAN FORMICA LTD. — Respondent

Court: High Court
PLD 1967
Criminal Appeal No. 131 of 1964, decided on 24th February 1967.

P L D 1967 Dacca 826

MUHAMMAD SHAFIULLAH‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Court:
PLD 1967
26th May 190

P L D 1967 Karachi 492

BANDENAWAZ LTD.‑Appellant Versus REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS, KARACHI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents

Court: High Court