The trial court dismissed the case filed by the plaintiffs for trial of Articles 6 and 13, but the appellate court dismissed the trial court's ruling and order, and prosecuted it. Other witnesses who proved the truth of the Taleban despite being subjected to them, witnesses said that their testimony could not be broken, given that long-term witnesses, although they had rightly observed that the Talab Mu was an authentic In order to perform, the meeting was necessary and he said it was right. Used by a lawyer or agent, but as in the present case, the plaintiff himself performed the litigation, such a formal process, subsequently required by law, was not required by the lawyer for the defendant. Failed to detect error. It is the fact of the plaintiff / order-taker that the premature empire delayed the celebration of inquiry, after being informed by telephone through her leave. Referring to the trial court in this regard was of minor importance, when the appellate court's immunity or the pending appeal was not available against the appellate court, in which case the trial court's decision was rightly set aside. ? No irregularity or illegality, misrepresentation or reading of evidence, the appellate court's decision cannot interfere with the High Court's review jurisdiction under section 115; the CPC petition was dismissed \ r \ n
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
