A. IX, Rr 3 and 4 Demarcation Act, Article 163 and Section 5 Suit were dismissed for unlawful prosecution for recovery Limitation Maxim: Applicant's application barred in case of ignorance excuse Simultaneously rejected the plaintiff's request for accuracy for reinstatement was brought after a period of about five to five months while the Limitation Act, 1908, to set the order for the restoration of the case and the default dismissal. It was thirty days from the date of expulsion under Article 161 of the K when the plaintiff had not filed. The petition was applied for a delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act 1908 because it was not given legal advice, however, the juried faculty with maxim ignorance excused (the ignorance of the fact is exempt, but from the law Ignorance) courts should not have known. When the question of demarcation was not satisfactorily fulfilled in the merits of a case, any unconstitutional validation was sought by the courts. Sade
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013
