Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SARWAR KHAN versus DIN MUHAMMAD

Article 13 Prior to the trial of trial by the former emperors, the trial court ruled that the trial court had dismissed the plaintiff's notice that the trial court had dismissed the trial filed by the former emperors. The law was not proved by the Emperor failed to prove the date of sending or sending the notice through the preparation of post office records, even due to the absence of thumbprints or signatures on the notice. The receipt of the required notice by the vendor was not shown or proved. Neither the postman nor the record clerk nor the evidence of its delivery were presented, as evidence that copies of the photographs of the students' notice were inadmissible before the emperor was unable to prove the notice even through secondary evidence. But the appellate court's findings suffered. According to the misinterpretation of the evidence and the appellate court's decision to accept the appeal of the first emperors and set aside the judgment, their case was irregular in their exercise of revision powers under Section 115 CPC, The ruling of the appellate court's ruling of the former rulers was set aside. The trial court's dismissal order was upheld and maintained \ r \ n \ r \ n famous high court advocate from Manga Mandi lawyer