Find a Lawyer

MUKHTAR MUHAMMAD ALIAS MUKHTAR AHMAD versus MUHAMMAD YAQOOB

Section 13 legal evidence (10 of 1984), section 30 pre-discrimination case is considered with other evidence on the admission of witnesses examination statement does not challenge the statement in the key statement, the suit will be admitted The sale was made in favor of the defendants by mutation. Article 13 2004 2004 The plaintiff in his case pleaded that he had knowledge of the sale through a designated informant in 949 2004 The defense decided by the defendants was that the plaintiff testified in the witness testimony before the defendant's performance. Box knew in the wording that the plaintiff knew of the sale, on the day the mutation was confirmed, not a single question was made that the statement made by the plaintiff's witness was the informant of the sale who made the entry. On the day of the change, the plaintiff's knowledge of the plaintiff's other witnesses also admitted to some extent the fact that the trial court relied on the informant's admission. Stating that the e-suit appeal was also dismissed, the valid admission made by the plaintiff's witness (informant) was to be considered in the light of the aggregate evidence in the record; Plaintiff's testimony regarding Defendants 'specific requests for submission and failure to challenge Defendants' statement that the Plaintiff was aware of invalid sales prior to the performance of the first search, he said. The admission of the witness (informant) has gone to support the case of the recorded accused. courts r \ nTalbs question was upheld by the courts below list of supreme court advocates from Mubarik Pur lawyer