A. XLI, R 23 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), If the parties had presented evidence and decided on the merits of the case by the Appellate Court on section 42 remand, the appellate court should have examined the evidence and so on. According to this decision should be made. With the law if the evidence was not sufficient or an issue was dismissed, the appellate court may reject the case, decide on the existing evidence or obtain further evidence and in any case , The case could not be remanded simply because there was no one case. A decision or some other evidence was required, without reversing the decision on the merits, the remand was not lawful, the remand was repeated by the High Court, which wasted time and caused frustration in the litigation. Which is the record and the appropriate evidence on the matter. The appellate court, properly formed in this case, could have filed more evidence and decided to appeal the merit rather than remand the case and the opendi. The High Court set aside another period of litigation against the NGL, which the appellate court ordered the case to be sent to the trial court after the law was violated.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
