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

Copy

Copy legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

1960 PLD 48 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Copy -Certified copy of order of allotment not containing words "with four or five other families" whereas the original order was "to I and H with four or five other families"-No allegation of forgery-Mistake treated as one of copyist.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Copy", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/22164

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Copy"

PLD 2006
N/A

P L D 2006 Lahore 731

MIQDAD HUSSAIN — Appellant Versus JUDGE GUARDIAN COURT NO.1 and another — Respondents

Court: High Court
YLRN 2017
Civil Appeals Nos.106 and 107 of 2004, decided on 22nd May, 2013.

2017 Y L R Note 126

MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE — Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM and 4 others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court (AJ&K)
CLC 1980
1980-January-12

1980 C L C 1972

PENINSULAR & ORIENTAL STEAM NEVIGATION Co.-Appellant Versus PFIZER LABORATORIES LTD., KARACHI AND

Court: Karachi
PLD 1999
Civil Miscellaneous No.462 of 1998 in Writ Petition No.368‑R of 1963, decided on 19th November, 1998.

P L D 1999 Lahore 231

Mst. KALSOOM BEGUM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus AHMAD RAZA BUKHARI‑‑‑Respondent

Court:
CLC 1984
decided on 29th June, 1983.

1984 C L C 1208

BUDHA (DECEASED) AND 4 OTHERS‑ Petitioners Versus ALI BAKHSH AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 1978
3rd May 1978

P L D 1978 Lahore 1027

THE COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX & INCOME-TAX, RAWALPINDI ZONE, RAWALPINDI-Petitioner Versus MESSRS PAKISTAN TELEVISION CORPORATION LTD. RAWALPINDI- Respondent

Court: High Court
PLD 1976
Civil Revision No. 652 of 1973, decided on 18th February 1976.

P L D 1976 Lahore 802

MUHAMMAD DIN‑Appellant Versus Ch. MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE‑Respondent

Court: ‑‑ S. 12‑Limitation‑Exclusion of time required for obtaining certified copy‑Copy not ready on date given by Copying Agency‑Time from date of application till time of its preparation will be time "requisite" for obtaining such copy‑Such time to be excluded under S. 12, Limi tation Act‑Copy prepared on 14‑6‑71 but date given for its delivery being 15‑6‑71‑Appellant obtaining copy on 30‑6‑71 but filing appeal on 22‑7‑71‑Period spent by appellant from 30‑6‑71 to 22‑7‑71 Held, cannot be considered to be time requisite for obtaining certified copy.‑Limitation.
PLD 1991
1991-January-19

PLD 1991 Supreme Court 400

CANTONMENT BOARD, KHARIAN CANTT. through Executive Officer ‑‑‑ Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD SHAM ‑‑‑ Respondent

Court: High Court
PLD 2008
N/A

P L D 2008 Supreme Court 577

Mian MUHAMMAD SABIR — Appellant Versus Malik MUHAMMAD SADIQ through Legal Heirs and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
CLC 1979
2nd July 1979

1979 C L C 694

THE MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE SIALKOT Appellant, Versus MUHAMMAD IQBAL AND ANOTHER-Respondents

Court: Lahore