The trial court dismissed the lawsuit filed by the former umpire and the trial court's decision in section 6, 12 and 13 of the Eight Act (X of 1873), section 5 civil procedure code (v. 1908), section 115 pre-emptive amnesty The appeal against was dismissed by the appellate court's recent ruling, and orders passed by both courts were objected to on the basis that the trial court had recorded the defendants' witness statements without affidavit. , A violation of 1873. And this court had no choice but to record the witness's statement after the oath or affirmation. The validity court was obliged to take an oath to testify if the court examines the witness without an oath, which would have a negative impact on the evidence. Receive such remand to the relevant court to record the evidence of the witnesses, when the witnesses were not given an oath, the error committed by the judge or the court should not be prejudiced, for any witness to take oath. Permission will not be cured in the case of any illegal proceedings. In this case, the evidence of the four witnesses was recorded without an oath, their evidence was inadmissible and may also be invalid. Imported decisions / orders of the following two courts. Was set aside and the case was remanded to the trial court, as directed. After three defendants took oaths and heard the arguments in the agreement, the parties decided within three months.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
