Find a Lawyer

SHAH MULK versus MST. HUSSAN PARI

Sections 42 & 54 54 The Case for Declaration and Permanent Order The defendant petitioned to declare that he was the owner of the suit property on the basis of two acts and that the defendants had no connection with the defendants banned from interfering with the said property. was not. The plaintiff's claim was also sought on the basis of two valid claims; it was his duty to prove the two documents by presenting them as a minor witness and author, but in order to prove these documents, None of them were produced in the trial court, the plaintiff's lawyer said at this time, both minor witnesses said the actions were dead, but the record of the case denied the defendant's lawyer's position. Neither has filed a petition stating that the minor witnesses and the executors have passed away, nor any permission from the trial Requested. In presenting the secondary evidence, both the plaintiffs said they were bound to prove the work, but failed to do so where the party, if it did not have the best evidence, would presume that if the witnesses were presented. If the prosecution failed to prove two acts against them, then the courts below had their case dismissed rightly and in the absence of any false statement / reading of evidence or No illegal or irregular or wrongful or wrongdoing of any legal jurisdiction does not interfere with the decisions of the courts below by the High Court. To be. \ r \ n top civil advocates from Hub Chowki lawyer