Arts 17 and 79 Special Relief Act (of 1877), Claims for filing Articles 8, 42 and 54, permanent injunction and possession suit meant that they lost their respective Shariah shares in the legacy of their deceased father and Defendant could not prove the gift change in favor of his late father Defendant, who claimed two gift modifications in favor of the deceased owner of the property, the beneficiaries are obliged to provide proof Also confirmed it, but failed to present the testimony that defendants obliged to present the patwari lighter in support of the gift conversion, which The Tehsildar, who entered the alleged alterations, who confirmed the transfer and testified to the other minor witnesses testified to the change, but failed to present the said testimony because he was the owner of the change suit. He was able to sell his property in the form of sales, mortgages, exchanges, favors, taxes. k, etc; and in each case when the same modifications / actions were challenged, the beneficiaries were obliged to prove the evidence under the evidence of law, Arts 17 and 79 of 1984, which the defendants The appellate court below failed to prove. In view of the legal and factual aspects of the conversion of gifts, the case was decided in a summary manner, which could not be said in the appellate court's decision, as neither the evidence was properly appreciated nor the following This law was discussed by the Appellate Court above. The decisions and orders of the two courts below were set aside and filed by the plaintiffs.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
