Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASLAM versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE

Section 12 law evidence (10 of 1984), the specific performance of Article 79 suit for sale alleges that the plaintiff paid Rs 1,92,000 at the time of execution of the contract, while the defendant was paid 1,21, 000 Balance amount was paid The claimant's request for receipt was that such documents were forged. And that it granted the plaintiff's brother-in-law a lease suit for a year, which played such a pretext for deceiving the plaintiff, the plaintiff showed no reasonable cause for such a trivial testimony of such documents. Such documents were not dealt with, nor was it dismissed that such documents were dealt with by the plaintiff or the plaintiff in the same bore signatures without having been examined by them. In the presence of CES who were certified as cash in lieu of checks, pay orders or demand drafts. Plaintiff did not dispute the statement made in court in support of such a request by the plaintiff for being impossible and suspicious. Circumstances r \ n jobs for fresh advocates from Mir Ali lawyer