Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASHIQ versus NIAZ AHMAD

A. XXXVII, Rr 2 and 3 Stamp Act (II of 1899), suits for receipt of money on the basis of provisions 12, 33, 35, 36 and 61, promising the execution of the promissory note, the execution of the promissory note. The defendant also admitted before the trial court that he was ready to settle a dispute with the plaintiff and to pay the disputed amount in easy installments. Ready, but defendants initially objected that the promissory note was not properly sealed and stamps on it were not crossed. Ai no question was raised in connection with his objections in a written statement of the plaintiff's witnesses, the trial court was justified before the trial court on the preliminary objection. The defendants will not need to prove that they have to pay with the promise to decide the case against Ed and it was sufficient that if the execution of the promissory note was either proved or admitted, the trial court's decision In the absence of any weakness and illegality, the appeal cannot be interfered with. famous lower court advocate from Matiari lawyer