Find a Lawyer

LIAQAT ALI versus MUZAFFAR KHAN

In section Q Qun Qanun Shahadat (1984 1984 of the ten), Article Tal Tal was dismissed for possession of the Talibs suit, stating that when Talib i was made, Talha had Ashd. The notice was not transferred due to a transfer not made. And that the notice was not actually beer, was presented and was not allowed to present the secondary evidence. A copy of the notice, along with the admissibility plaintiff, stated that two witnesses stated that the notice was issued and that the witnesses had confirmed the same copy. Notice was sent to the postal and AD receipt of the evidence. Apparently the documents were self-notices The law evidence, Article 77 of 1984, exempted the said document from the strictness of the law, a copy of the notice was admissible as secondary evidence and was there for the same document to the court. Any need for permission could be submitted in the witness statements for proof of its execution, confirmation and confession. His deposed High Court, in the circumstances, accepted the plea of the review, setting aside the decisions and orders of the two courts, that the case be considered as a trial before the trial court, which the evidence in this case is new. Will record from the end. Consider the case and decide on the market value of the suit land law firms from Dina lawyer