Find a Lawyer

KHAN SIDDIQUE versus ABDUL AKBAR KHAN

Section 42 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), AX Exxon, RR 1, 2 suits for declaration that the plaintiff claimed that he owned half of the dispute, while the other half was owned by the plaintiff and he was the defendant. Is not entitled. Selling the total land to the plaintiff / other defendant The plaintiff stated that the sale of the suit property by the defendant to the extent of half of the plaintiff was a result of wrongful, invalid, illegal and fraudulent means and to cancel the plaintiff. Was responsible for not presenting any credible evidence. Explain why their parents' names were not included in the revenue record as their owners. Why they were specifically excluded from the suit land ownership and why the plaintiff and their forefathers remained silent for a long time, giving the plaintiffs the opportunity to investigate and investigate the witnesses and to prepare a revenue record, To no avail. At the time the party could not be allowed to fill in the blanks through the preparation of evidence, and then the plaintiff could not show that the plaintiff's negligence or that of his 3 lawyers at the appropriate time to present the relevant records to them Suitable opportunity should not be provided. At any stage, the defendants in the original court and the Court of Appeal rejected the case filed by the plaintiffs, properly appreciated the evidence available on the record and properly rejected the plaintiffs' request for other visits. , If allowed, would need to fill in the blanks. Avoid unnecessary delays in evidencing evidence and litigation at the expense of injustice with defendants best law firms from Mansehra lawyer