Article 59 was the Special Relief Act (of 1877), the suit for the declaration of the claimant's claim of section 42 that the suit land was owned and occupied by it. And the defendant did not contend that the plaintiff with the said plaintiff rejected the claim of the plaintiff and claimed that the plaintiff had executed the sale in respect of the suit in favor of the plaintiff and said That because of this she is in a bargain. As the plaintiff's landlord, his plaintiff alleged that his right-hander's case was fraudulent and unlawful because it had not been processed by him, in compliance with a court order, disputing between the parties. Talking about the sale issue. Fingerprint Expert Council for the parties were sent to the plaintiff's cell dead and fingerprints stating that the appeal would be decided on the basis of the opinion of the chandelier print expert under Article 59 of the Conan Shahadat, 1984 The opinion was relevant and can be read with evidence when the court was to establish an opinion on the identification of fingerprint impressions, the opinion of the experts said that the relevant expert was the witness who took the time and study for a particular branch of learning. Was devoted to the task and was particularly skilled at the points on which he was asked to present his opinion. In order to enable the court to draw a satisfactory conclusion. His statement should not be relied upon without being recorded, so that the party against whom the expert formed the opinion can examine it, but where either party acknowledges the expert's opinion and the expert is a witness in court. Not to say, then expert
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2012
