Find a Lawyer

PIRAN DITTA versus MST. KUNDAN

Arts, 76, & 77 & (85 ()) Controversy over the implementation of the registered document The original registered document, did not appear Secondary evidence, the scope of the plaintiff's production filed the claim that the plaintiff owner registered Deed-based suit occupies the land. The plaintiff could not present a registered sale deed in this regard which caused it to disappear, the witnesses died so the plaintiff could only present the copy in evidence as the defendants primarily claimed on the matter. The original sale was not committed to the court, so its copy is admissible in evidence. The trial court ruled in the suit and the appeal filed by the appellate court was dismissed, under Art. 76 Q and 77. 77, the law had to present the original registered document of this testimony, 1984 1984 original, as the initial evidence by the plaintiff where the original document was Z was not allowed. The document had to be referred to the court for secondary evidence leading to the document itself to prove its accuracy after a dispute over its execution was registered with the registered document, when the Law of Martyrs, 1984 A registered document under 85 (5) was barred from becoming a public document, at which point its implementation became controversial when both documents acknowledged the copy of the original document in evidence. High Court remands trial without jurisdiction \ r \ n \ r \ n best advocate from Chunian lawyer