O XXIII, R 1 (3) The fresh trial defendant's contention after withdrawing the first case without authorization was that the defendant's testimony was withheld because of his earlier entry into the cross-examination because earlier The lawsuit was to be filed and withdrawn. No further question about the justification was placed on the witness whether such a return was with the Supreme Court or without it to the defendant to prove his request, which was strictly forbidden by any Had also failed to include evidence that the case on which it was based was based. Due to the action and it was withdrawn without the court's permission, O XXIII, R 1 cannot be subjected to CPC in the absence of a prior suit and court order.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
