Find a Lawyer

SULEMAN versus REHMAT ALI

The Special Relief Act 1877 section 39 & 42 filed for the declaration and termination of the sale process for being fake and forgery that it had purchased the land from the claimant about 10/12 years ago and had taken possession of it at that time. The trial court ruled that the case was over, and the appellate court dismissed the case in an appeal filed by the plaintiff. In his presence, no witness had told the plaintiff that the contents of the documents were read to the plaintiff and that he had identified the same plaintiff after understanding his contents and nature, even though he was a limber. The fact that he was unable to sign was sufficient evidence that the plaintiff was an illiterate person. At the time of the allegation, the plaintiff did not prove possession of the suit land, payment of the sale price, the payment of the sale price to the plaintiff in a person's betrothal, as described by the defendant in the cross examination. This was not verified by scrutiny, in which the appellate court's findings were a result of gross misrepresentation and failure to read the evidence. On record, the High Court accepted the request for review, restoring the trial court by putting aside the unknown verdict and order, thereby securing the verdict. list of supreme court advocates from Ghari Dupatta lawyer