AKBAR KHAN versus ALLIED BANK OF PAKISTAN THROUGH PRESIDENT
O XVIII, Rr 4, 5, 6, O VI, R 2 & Section 115 Qunun e Shahadat (10 of 1984), Article 129 This suit was filed by the defendant against the submission of the testimony by the prosecution in the mini-suit court. His brother had not been paid because his brother said that he had died before receiving his money. The plaintiff acknowledged that his deceased brother had received the money sent to his brother by the defendant and that his brother had put his signature on the original bank draft, but later he had done so. Denied the admission and said that the admission was not as a stoppel validity plaintiff, though the appellate court could produce a complaint other than adding or manipulating its statement. The aforementioned ground was omitted, therefore, the admission, which was made during the judicial proceedings, is held by the process as a stoppel. Such proceedings were carried out in accordance with the law relating to the recording of evidence IV, R,, &, and the CPC provided effective protection against the deposition of witnesses in court, therefore, no addition to the plaintiff. It cannot be believed that the plaintiff cannot be allowed to aggravate the alleged manipulation of his statement at the revision stage because in that case he should have been summoned at trial or the claimant would have sought his claim. Could not prove that the suit was excluded without substance.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
