Find a Lawyer

ABDUL WAHAB ABBASI versus GUL MUHAMMAD HAJANO

O IX, R 13 Defaneration Ex parte The defendant's statement on the quantum oath of recovery of malicious prosecution damages was the plaintiff's claim and he made a party to the constitutional petition filed by the defendant before the High Court, against which Some of the charges were dropped, whose plea was dismissed by the High Court plaintiff against the defendant for Rs. 60,60,000 as a fine for prosecution. The burden was on the defendant, who did not file a written statement or deny the affidavit, to prove the prosecution or the indictment true. The plaintiff's statement about the plaintiff's statement was disproved and the allegations in the constitutional petition filed by the defendant were infamous in nature and the allegation that the plaintiff was inferior in the estimation of others and that the allegation was proved. Failure to make the claim against the plaintiff in the application was true Intiff was a respected officer and enjoying good reputation and a false and malicious prosecution has affected his reputation in his profession and business. False and malicious allegations have damaged credibility, financially damaged the plaintiff's court, and themselves God was able to question about losses. In view of the circumstances of the case, the High Court had awarded the plaintiff the prosecution as compensation of Rs. 15,00,000 for the prosecution. solicitors from Jhang lawyer