In order to prove the demand for jumping, the evidence of the victim's 13th verdict was filed in favor of the pre-emptor not to mention the time and date of the suit, as well as the confirmation of the trial court and the lower appellate court, If the source of the knowledge or the informant was not mentioned in the plaintiff. After giving the importer proof, I could not prove such a fact, because the fact of knowledge was not mentioned through knowledge because it was necessary to mention the source knowledge in the source, hence, the name of the informant in the sheet. There was no evidence to take it. The demand for jumping is available to prove because the plaintiff's witnesses did not state the time of the information and the other witness was not a witness of the Talbot Mu Competition, therefore, the pre-emptor law did not prove the demand for the jump. Accordingly, he was not entitled to judgment and excluded the decisions passed by the courts under the High Court and the case filed by both the courts and the pre-emptor below was dismissed. \ nIn other circumstances, another appeal was allowed
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
