Article 5 of the Constitution and Schedule to the Constitution (1973), Article 199 Constitutional application suit for the collection of gold jewelry etc. Both courts simultaneously found the wife entitled to recover the gold jewelry, which weighs five weights, and is sufficient material to occupy agricultural land and residential property. The wife's claim was available on record in support of the claim and no credible evidence was presented in the rejected courts, and her use of constitutional jurisdiction was properly appreciated by the record and the High Court, in search of fact. Could not interfere, even upon examination. According to the evidence, it was possible to come to a different conclusion, unless it was shown that the lower court had to suffer because of such misinterpretation or not reading the evidence which led to the findings on the merits. Has not been able to successfully challenge husband-in-law. The courts below failed to discover and also show that the material on the record was not appreciated legally and that the wife's claim was mechanically accepted without the request of the court's mind dismissing the constitutional request. Was gone
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
