Find a Lawyer

MANZOOR AHMAD versus KHAN MUHAMMAD

A. XLI, R 27 Special Relief Act (I of 1877), the production of additional evidence suit for the possession of section 8 suit was dismissed by the trial defendant during the trial, one of the plaintiffs and five defendants. Applied for submission to the Medical Board To find out whether the defendant was the son of the property owner in the dispute about the DNA test, the appellate court found that the defendants filed further evidence in the petition for the DNA test to be referred to the medical board. Request for the application, but none of the claimants did so. Neither the original court requested nor was there any reason or the good reason to allow such a request. The appellate court has further said that if the application is allowed, which in their case is the money to pay the money left by them, the appellate court was justified. In the light of the law contained in the AXLI, R-27, the CPC, the CPC application for additional evidence, such as a DNA test request, was not submitted to the original court which ruled the appeal. Priority was given And the appellate court did not have to present any document or examine any witnesses so that they could be able to make a decision or for any other purpose, the appellate court held that DNA tests were not required. The manufacture of such evidence may be permitted. It was only approved when the appellate court had sufficient reasons to require it when there was sufficient evidence on record to declare a decision by the appellate court and no other evidence was needed to record additional evidence. patent advocate from Mari Indus lawyer