Find a Lawyer

NAWAB ALI versus SARDAR ALI

Sections 115 and A. XXXIX, Rr 1 and 2 amending the temporary injunction, the trial court's grant, in the present case, on examining the material on record, considered the matter temporarily subject to grant and denial. had gone. The trial court had high, strong, and controversial reasons for the injunction being dismissed, which were not open for exception; the appellate court also held that the scope of section 115, CPC was limited, for legitimate reasons, e.g. The High Court could not intervene. Amendment jurisdiction with conclusions concurring on the question of fact presented by the following two courts, unless it contains a study of misrepresentation and evidence, unless it can be proved that wrong decisions and injunctions Is subjected to misreading and not reading material on the record without any positive effort. The fact is, no matter what the outcome, the final finding of the fact recorded by the lower courts could not, in practice, be disturbed by the High Court, under the amended jurisdiction under F-section 115, CPC. The authority, as long as the two courts below, either found the evidence to be inaccurate while recording the fact finding or ignored any material evidence on the record or because the fact finding was dependent on the record evidence. Applicant from was not eligible. The decision was removed to identify any type of illegal or irregularity that appeared in the forum, justifying the intervention of the High Court in its affirmative jurisdiction. lawer from fb area from Usta Mohammad lawyer