The suit for simultaneous declaration of title to the land and permanent injunction against Arts 17 and 79 of the Special Relief Act (1 of 1877), sections 42 and 54, was decided simultaneously by the defendants meeting the lower courts. Wally was discovered on the basis that he was misinformed and misread. The fingerprint expert's justification of the evidence, concluding that the defendant's sample thumb impressions do not correspond to the fingerprints on the petition author's register nor that the defendant's alleged involvement with those on the registry Failed to commit the sale. This meant that in fact, there was no contract of sale by the plaintiffs in their favor when the fraud was alleged, then the beneficiary of the document was responsible for proving that the disputed document was Was prepared in accordance with the law and no fraud or fraud was committed. They were supposed to prove the documents true, but neither they could present the actual sale process nor were they executed by the defendant as a thumb, the comments were on the record. No payment receipt was available or according to Articles 17 and 79, no witness could be produced by the defendants. Qanun e Shahadat, 1984 revision rejected
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
