Find a Lawyer

HASNAIN AHMED SHAH versus IJAZ AHMED SHAH

AXXIII, R3 Law on the Affidavit in Defendant's Offer for Sale of the Evidence (10 of 1984), Arts 163 and 129 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 12 Suit for Oral Contract In order to decide the case, the plaintiff did not refuse to offer his case based on the defendant's statement, which was required in his previous two petitions under Article 163 of the Martyrdom Act, the 1984 plaintiff's case. Had not denied his statement before. Neither the court nor his transfer request for the offer, instead of accepting the defendant's statement and signing the defendant, in the presence of his lawyer, another lawyer on the order sheet only for identification purposes. Signed, the plaintiff did all this while losing. In this case, it cannot be allowed to go back saying that the defendant's statement on the oath was not recorded correct Assessment of accuracy was always involved in the judicial proceedings. The defendants' statement should have been recorded circumstances The circumstances were overturned in the circumstances. pakistani advocates Chiniot lawyer