Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YAQOOB versus REHMATULLAH

During the course of the trial during the trial for Articles 6 and 13 during the trial, the students claimed in the plaintiff that they had found out about the sale and had made the plaintiffs' contract. And his notice was taken to the defendant, which was received by him when the plaintiff did not make the student contract at the time of acquiring knowledge, but he himself stated that he was on the relevant date in the evening. Around 3/4 pm the defendant approached the defendant and claimed to have returned the case, although the defendant The plaintiff did not perform this action and stated in the plaintiff that he had sent the notice to the defendant for the notice of counsel, which he had received, but during the hearing, he had sent the notice to the court. The plaintiff himself admitted that there was no post office in the village plaintiff, in which case, the contrary view of performance was taken by the appellate court below, in the circumstances, the petitioner's immunity. And correctly changed the trial court's finding that the search had been made, prohibiting any illegal practice or disorderly conduct. I will convey the evidence on the trial court improperly record the statement. In the judgment and decree dismissing the plaintiff's case by the appellate court, it cannot be interfered with by the High Court in review. top advocate from Loralai lawyer