Find a Lawyer

HAYATULLAH JAN versus JAN ALAM

Proof of Notice in relation to Article I & QQ Statute of Testimony (of 1984 of of), Art 74 74, 79 Pre and 3 153 Pre-publication, Notice to the shopkeepers by pre-emptor in registered envelopes Such documents, which were returned inadmissible, were photostat copies of the notice, as the testimony did not prove in accordance with the requirements of Articles 74, 79, and 153 of the 1984 Act, as no witnesses had obtained their signatures or thumbs. He did not testify to the accuracy and did not testify to any of the witnesses. He was acquitted who, in the circumstances, took photographs of the original, the plaintiff, had failed to meet the requirement of the student in accordance with section 13 of the North West Frontier Province Pre-Impression Act 1987. family advocate from Shikarpur lawyer