Recognised
Recognised legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Meaning.
"Recognised", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/13511
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Recognised"
1989 C L C 485
ABSAR HUSSAIN and another‑‑Petitioners Versus PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Education, Islamabad and
Court: Karachi1999 P T D 3036
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus MICA TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA
Court: 229 I T R 2681999 P T D 259
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus INDOCEAN ENGINEER (P.) LTD.
Court: 225 I T R 201P L D 1996 Supreme Court 182
MUHAMMAD SADIQ and others ‑‑‑ Appellants Versus UNIVERSITY OF SINDH and another ‑‑‑ Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑‑ S. 10(2) ‑‑‑ Word "may" as used in S.10(2), Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1976 ‑‑‑ Connotation ‑‑‑ Word "may" involves a choice and word "shall" involves an order ‑‑‑ Such would be the customary usage of the terms when they appear in a statute ‑‑‑ Even enabling word like "may" would become mandatory, when object was to effectuate a legal right.‑‑Words and phrases.1999 P T D 2022
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus RAAB PIPE WORKS (P.) LTD.
Court: 226 I T R 710P L D 1974 Supreme Court 228
M. U. A. KHAN‑Appellant Versus Rana M. SULTAN AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
Court:1971 P Cr
NABIR HOSSAIN alias CHOTA ABU AND ANOTHER Appellants Versus THE STATE‑Opposite‑Party
Court: High Court Dhaka1991 S C M R 1443
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL through his Legal Heirs and others — Appellants Versus GHULAM HAIDER and 3 others — Respondents
Court: ----S.15---Courts only enforce the rights and there could be no enlargement or depreciation of the rights by coming to the Court---Rights must be possessed outside the Court before same could be enforced through the Court-- Assumption that limitation and qualifications applied for Courts and not attached to the right itself in pre-emption cases, would not be correct.---Administration of justice.1990 M L D 1736
QAIM DIN through Legal Heirs‑‑Appellant Versus SAID AHMAD through Legal Heirs and another‑‑Respondents
Court: LahoreP L D 1968 Lahore 897
Mst. MAQSOODA BEGUM‑Appellant Versus Maulvi ABDUL HAQ AND OTHER — Respondents
Court: Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)----S. 7‑Pre‑emption, right of‑Recognised only where custom existed before commencement of Act‑Right not extended to towns or outgrowths or suburbs of town, coming into existence after passing of Act notwithstanding such existence of custom in such areas‑Custom existing in Pakpattan town not extended to its new extension‑Umar Bakhsh v. Abdul Karim and others 70 P R 1898 ; Muhammad Din v. Shah Din and another 90 P R 1907 ; Imperial Oil, Soap and General Mills Co. Ltd., Delhi v. M. Misbah‑ud‑Din and others I L R 2 Lah. 83 ; Vaishno Das v. Hem Raj and others A I R 1921 Lah. 279 ; Lekh Raj and Ramji Das v. Inder Mal and Sain I L R 4 Lah. 176 ; Lai Chard v. Kartar Singh and another A I R 1947 Lah. 265 and Ram Lal v. Municipal Committee, Bhera and another A I R 1947 Lah. 386 rel. and Miran Bakhsh v. Muhammad Akram Khan and another A I R 1937 Lab. 167 not fol..