Find a Lawyer

BAKHTIAR AHMED versus MUHAMMAD SAEED

A. VIII, R2 Laws During the judgment of the suit for collection of evidence (Article 10 of 1984), Article 163 of the Oaths Act (X of 1873), Articles 8, 9, 10 and 11, the defendants themselves applied. The effect was that he was ready to take an oath on the Koran and his wife divorced if his oath was wrong that he had paid the plaintiff the entire amount. It has been said that if the plaintiff takes oath on the Koran, then the plaintiff admitted that he was ready to take oath from the Quran as per the defendant's offer and in the judicial case the court ruled and adjourned the case accordingly. The hearing decision was upheld. The appellate court defendant, who challenged the unanimous decision of the courts under review, claimed that no decree could be granted if a defendant had taken oath from the Holy Quran. ? d Through the plaintiff and the trial of the plaintiff, the court satisfied that the claim of the plaintiff was genuine and that the plaintiff could not be allowed to mock Holly nor exclude the offer made by her. Cannot be allowed unless it is a contract. The trial court properly dismissed the case and the appellate court rightly dismissed the plaintiff's appeal, in the absence of an illegal, material irregularity or permanent error or defect, modifying the concurrent findings of the courts below. I cannot interfere. In front of the High Court female advocates from Tobatek Singh lawyer