MUHAMMAD AKRAM versus MUHAMMADRAUF
A. XXXVII, RR 1 and 2 suits for the collection of money, the point of instability of the suit in the premises, the document on which it was filed was a bond and not a promise vacancy and thus a suit on that basis. Cannot file. Earlier, the borrower did not seek leave to defend the case or in a written statement or during the arguments before the trial court, nor on the appeal grounds did the documents in question prove the promise of vacancy. Was granted and the trial was sustained on its basis and the plaintiff successfully proved that it had loaned to the defendant, who processed the trial and its recovery, after the trial. , After scanning all the evidence on record, dismissed the suit in the absence of litigation / any of the evidence Cannot interfere with the reading of the article, the judgment and the decree passed by the trial court
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
registration advocate from Gujranwala lawyer
