In section 115 of the Special Relief Act (of 1877), the respondent's section 42 suit objected to the ability to request a review on the basis that the documentary evidence presented by the parties was not included in the amendment before the trial court. Yes, the respondents' reasonable objection was legitimate. The documentary evidence which was not included in the review cannot be taken into account that the documentary evidence was not present on the record and, without considering or passing it on, did not set aside the judgment passed by the appellate court. Could go The suit is more legitimate than the property and it was not permissible for the suit in light of the bar contained in section 42 of the Special Relief Act, 1877, to sue the suit without praying for the possession of the suit property, thereby granting it Was rejected.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
