Find a Lawyer

DR. IJAZ AHMAD versus MST. NASREEN AKHTAR

Comparison of the signatures in the judgment pursuant to Article Q 42 Legislative Evidence (of 1984 1984, Ten), Arts & 84 and 5 145 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Article 115 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) Failure to counter the signatures of disputed persons in the High Court's jurisdiction review jurisdiction Our case claims that the plaintiff owns the suit on the basis of a registered sale deed executed in his favor. And one of the remaining owners' general attorneys, the minor witnesses and teachers of the cell deed, supported the trial deed in favor of the plaintiff's decision and the trial corps An order passed by T, under which the case was dismissed, was set aside by the Appellate Court and the High Court was ordered in the process of reviewing the case. The jurisdiction upheld the decision and order passed by the appellant Court of Appeal by the defendant that the signatures on the controversial sale agreement were not obtained by the executive. During the evidence, the Tent Validity High Court personally reviewed the sales process executor's signatures and compared it with the recognized signatures of the competitor, and met with the same accused as the executor signed his sales contract. Was denied, therefore, the law did not have to present the same issue with the execution by the plaintiff in view of the provisions of Article 145 of the Evidence Order, either in the 1984 plaintiff's decision or for any of these reasons. Did not show the weakness, legal or factual facts that led to the High Court. The decision passed by the High Court in reaching this conclusion is not open to any concession. best law firm from Jacobabad lawyer