Court, Powers of
Court, Powers of legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Court, Powers of Court, powers of-Court in its inherent powers, can cancel Us own invalid orders by recording that what was done was without jurisdiction-Not necessary to go further and see that any fraud or deceit was practised.
"Court, Powers of", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/15245
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Court, Powers of"
1981 C L C 1728
Haji MUHAMMAD SHAFI‑Petitioner Versus Mst. RANI AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents
Court: Lahore2001 P T D 2618
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX Versus PEERLESS CONSULTANCY AND SERVICES (P.) LTD.
Court: 248 I T R 1782010 P L C 1
Mst. NOOR BEGUM Versus COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION AND AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT and 2 others
Court: Karachi High CourtP L D 1978 Karachi 1093
MOTHERWELL BRIDGE CONTRACTING & TRADING Co. LTD.‑ — Plaintiff Versus RIAZ ALI KHAN ETC.‑Defendants
Court: ‑‑ S. 20 read with Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XL, r. 1 Appointment of receiver‑Discretionary with Court‑Powers of Court not controlled by Advocate's statement withdrawing application for appointment of receiver and Court can appoint receiver notwith standing such withdrawal should it be just and convenient to do so-- Court also not to be guided for appointment of a person of choice of parties‑Absolute disinterestedness‑Indispensable qualification for a receiver‑Party to litigation‑Not to be appointed as receiver except under very special circumstances or with consent of other parties- One of proposed receivers a Financial Adviser of plaintiff while other an Advocate for defendant‑Creditors vehemently opposing such appointments on ground of parties being in collusion and such receivers being interested in parties‑No wastage alleged by parties and parties failing to make out a prima facie case for appointment of receivers‑Applications for appointment of receivers to carry on business of joint ventures, to effect settlement of accounts, to effect realisations and payments, and generally to wind up all affairs covered by joint venture agreements between parties, in circumstances, dismissed.‑Receiver.P L D 1986 Karachi 390
F. BRUMMEL AND 3 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: --S. 31‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 435, 439 & 561‑A‑Appeal‑Appeal against decision of Drugs Court is competent before a Bench of two Judges of High Court‑Power of appeal, revision and inherent jurisdiction go hand in hand and could be exercised at equal footing by High Court.‑‑‑Appeal (civil).1976 S C M R 388
NASIR AHMAD AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus KHUDA BAKHSH AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
Court: High Court1997 C L C 1204
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Mst. BASHIR BIBI‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Board of Revenue PunjabP L D 2022 Federal Shariat Court 9
HAMMAD HUSSAIN and another — Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad and another — Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 2022 Federal Shariat Court 21
HAMMAD HUSSAIN and another — Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad and another — Respondents
Court: High Court2025 P Cr
Muhammad Ayub — Appellant Versus Robkar-e-Adalat through Additional Advocate General, Mirpur
Court: Supreme Court (AJ&K)