Find a Lawyer

HASHTAMAND versus HABIB KHAN

Section 115 of the Specific Relief Act (of 1877), Section 42 of the Evidence (10 of 1984), Article 129 (g) of the trial court and the appellate court overruled the final findings of the facts recorded by the above courts. had gone. Based on the correct definition of evidence, which hardly sought the intervention of the High Court in its revised jurisdiction, the evidence presented by the applicant was lacking and was not affected by the trust which came to court. And urges the court to accept the facts as truth. The burden of proving the same by bringing credible evidence to the record, but in the present case, there was no evidence that the basis of the applicant's claim, the stampede death, did not prove satisfactory as it was stated that the process. Was not submitted. There is no reason for the petitioner to stop and that the witnesses were given if the best piece of evidence was available and not presented by a party, then it was assumed that you had some ulterior motive behind it and the law. Under the example (g) of Article 129 of 1984, 1984, it can be assumed that if the above evidence were presented, it would not be in favor of the party in fact or the findings regarding the question. Laws recorded by the court / jurisdiction of the jurisdiction cannot be interfered with in the amended jurisdiction, unless the consequences of judicial jurisdiction, illegal or material misconduct, To interfere with the conclusions of the facts in the amended jurisdiction under section 115, CPC. The High Court upheld its limited jurisdiction immigration advocates email from Abbaspur lawyer