Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD TARIQ versus ABDUL RAZAQ

Section 13 students were the co-owners of the plaintiff's performance suit property while the defendants did not have such qualifications The plaintiffs had the pre-qualification rights and their testimony regarding the performance and performance of the students. Was incompatible. The record of the material aspects of the case that was fatal to the pre-arrest claim made such contradictions in the truth of the plaintiff and his witnesses doubtful in relation to Talisman's performance of the trial. The precise mention of the performance of the information I mentioned was not mentioned in the notice of dismissal, there was no evidence in support of the claim of the plaintiff that there was a sale transaction to defeat his right. According to the evidence on the exchange record for the better management of the suit land by the trial court, the evidence was not supported by the appellate court and they were not sustained in the trial court. The suit was properly dismissed by the appellant, under which the appellate court dismissed the plaintiff's case as invalid and unlawful and was granted by it. The appellate court was set aside and the trial court was restored to those who accepted the circumstances.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015

• MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PESHAWAR v. TAIMUR-UL-HASSAN 2015 PLD 39
• GHULAM ABBAS v. SHER MUHAMMAD 2015 MLD 42
• MUJEEB-UR-REHMAN BAIG v. ASHRAF ALI 2015 PLD 44
• MUHAMMAD IMRAN v. State 2015 PCrLJ 45
• ZHUR BAS v. GUL MURAD 2015 PLD 51
• Mst. FARYAL GOHAR v. GHANDRA UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR 2015 YLR 51
• ZIA UR REHMAN v. State 2015 PLD 54
• BARKAT SHAH v. SHAMS UR REHMAN 2015 MLD 57

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2015 →

list of supreme court advocates from Dadakhel lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes