Find a Lawyer

WAKEEL KHAN versus AFSAR KHAN

In addition to the Section 115 and the AXLI, R 31 Revision Scope Trial Court, the appellate court rendered the case a provocative and appropriate decision, which was not amenable to both the High Court's amending jurisdiction. After proper scrutiny of the evidence on file and discussing all matters and conditions, all decisions were made which resulted in no legal defect in the decisions of the courts below, which was consistent with the evidence on file. The conclusions reached by the courts were not open to challenge in civil revision, especially when no specific writings and evidence were read to indicate that the appellate court was alive to the situation and involved. The issues were dealt with and the appellate court cautiously ruled by the appellate court. All points of dispute and inquiries about any prejudice, it seems, is a question to be given to the applicants as to the cause of the matter by the appellate court, which is the case under the OCLI, R 31, CPC. There was no need and it was enough for the appellate court to deal with all the issues, as the content was left to settle the dispute. The appellate appellate court, while recording its findings on the points raised before it, without discussing these matters separately, could not have committed any illegal or inaccurate form even in the case of the formation of other cases. The law was firmly settled where the parties held a trial. With all the awareness of the dispute between them, matters relating to framing or instability will lose importance, depending on the trial. advocate from Mohmand lawyer