Home Maxims & Terms Patent Fact meaning in Urdu
Word Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Patent Fact

Patent Fact legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2001 YLR 2387 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
"Patens fact "Scope

Fact that needs an elaborate inquiry to establish, is not a "patent fact".

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Patent Fact", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/22287

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Patent Fact"

PLD 1952
1948-July-17

P L D 1952 (Rev) Punjab 7

Mst. MAHANDAN‑Petitioner Versus GHULAM MUHAMMAD and another‑Respondents

Court: High Court
SCMR 1977
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 220 of 1977, decided on 8th October 1977.

1977 S C M R 519

MAJOR (Retd.) AURANGZEB‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE.‑ — Respondent

Court: ‑‑ S. 498‑Bail, interim‑Grant or refusal of interim bail‑‑Essentially a matter within High Court s discretion‑‑Supreme Court reluctant to interfere with exercise of such discretion unless discretion shove to be exercised arbitrarily or capriciously or in disregard of patent facts of case.‑Bail.
CLC 2002
R.O.R. Nos.2149 and 2150 of 2000, decided on 7th January, 2002.

2002 C L C 1980

MUHAMMAD USMAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Collector, Hafizabad and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Board of Revenue, Punjab
YLR 2005
W.P. No. 18917 of 2004, decided on 25th November, 2004.

2005 Y L R 890

ABDUL HAMID‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SIKANDAR ALI and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1989
Civil Revision No.74 of 1987, decided on 20th March, 1989.

1989 C L C 1666

NOOR SAHIB KHAN and 3 others‑‑Petitioners Versus MIR JANANSON and 6 others‑‑Respondents

Court: Peshawar
PLD 2009
2009-April-27

P L D 2009 Lahore 418

Mst. MUMTAZ BEGUM through Legal Heirs and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SHAFIQUE and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
YLR 2018
N/A

2018 Y L R 1813

MUHAMMAD IQBAL and others — Petitioners Versus RAB NAWAZ and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore (Multan Bench)
YLR 2001
N/A

2001 Y L R 2387

Mst. SHIREEN KHANUM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (REVENUE), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and

Court: Lahore
PLD 1981
Criminal Miscellaneous Application Nose 663 and 463‑ ‑of‑1979, decided on 23rd September, 1979.

P

AIJAZ AU Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Court: ‑‑ S. 497 (5)‑Criminal trial‑Bail, cancellation of‑Sessions Judge not making tentative appreciation of evidence but concluding matter about presence of eye‑witnesses‑Definite finding at bail stage held unjustified and detailed appreciation uncalled for‑Delay of 5J hours in filing F. 1. R. considered by Sessions Judge‑Delay not inordinate‑ Recoveries of revolvers and. other articles from accused and report of Ballistic Expert showing a reasonable prima facie case made out against accused under S. 302, P. P. C.‑Bail cancelled in circumstances.‑Bail.
PCRLJ 1980
Criminal Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 463 and 663 of 1979, heard on 9th September, 1979.

1980 P Cr

VIKIO‑Applicant Versus ABDULLAH AND ANOTHER‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Karachi