MUHAMMAD IQBAL versus GHULAM SAKEENA
Article 42 and QQ law evidence (Ten of 1984 of off), Article document72 The title and declaration of the illegal document, the dismissal of the evidence of the contentious document, which led the defendants to trial and ownership. The petition was sought for recovery but the trial court appealed. The court ruled on the same decision. Neither the slightest witness nor the notary public who confirmed the document were presented to the trial court until the stamp seller was presented to the plaintiffs and the document was not. There was no mention of the document, which makes sense of its legal impact. There was no false evidence available for payment of consideration and for this reason the oral evidence was not only suspicious but also an irrevocable decision and the order passed by the appellate court was set aside, and at the trial. The trial court was reinstated.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
family advocate from Khandabad lawyer
