Find a Lawyer

FAZAL SHER versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Convene Evidence Order 1984 Arts 30 and 31 Profit of proof of suit for confession of fact, the plaintiff's request was shown to the owner and the defendant as a tenant in the revenue record, the trial court stated. Based on the opinion that the plaintiff's adverse possession of the defendant was entered in the trial case and the appeal before the Court of Appeal was dismissed and the Appellate Court dismissed after its confirmation. Was done because he owned the suit land because the fact was not considered by the two courts below. Or even otherwise the defendants were not legally available for adverse possession in addition to the facts where the defendant's admission in cross-examination was not admissible, as in fact both of these courts were wrong. By way of the High Court for the exercise of jurisdiction for a side that was erroneous in the law for the plaintiff to consider the same as the admission. criminal advocate from Dera Ghazi Khan lawyer