Section 8 Convention of Evidence (10 of 1984), Arts 72, 78, 79 and 100 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), thirty years old document for the realization of section 115 suit seizure The fact is that the defendants claimed the case. Owns Demand for the acquisition of the land and its occupancy Defendants took the position on the date of the sale in 1967, relying on the agreement that their forefathers had purchased the land from the predecessor in the interest of the predecessor, and since then they have been under The owners of the possession were the trial court and the lower appellate court, eventually the verdict was made and the defendants appealed that the plaintiffs on behalf of the defendants had taken up the right to sell their possession with the truth of the agreement. The idea was attached. An assessment of accuracy was attached to the document, which came to proper custody, with the court having the discretion to accept the impression of this signature / thumb. And every other part of such document, intended to be written by any person, was in the same person's handwriting and it was officially executed by the person through whom it was executed. Proof of such agreement would have been inconsistent to prove the defendants' ownership, although the provisions of Article 79 of the Convention E-Martyrs 1984 were not applicable as the agreement was allegedly executed. 1 6 1967 But in view of Article 78 of the Convention Evidence 1984, the sale agreement document allegedly affecting the claimants in the interest of the claimants signed the signature / thumb, the plaintiff stated in his statement Had made an impression of Work on any process between professionals
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013
