Article Q 42 Laws of Martyrs (1984 Article) of, Article Su 59 Suits the Case of the Gift Accumulation Components Claiming the Owners of the Donors Regarding Donors Available on their Identity Card Patwari Light The impression was different as witnesses were unable to say whether the donor appeared at the time of confirmation of the suit mutation, and whether his statement was recorded by the local commissioner or not, the Patwari circle added. At the time of the endorsement, according to the Gordor circle, he wrote the names of the donors in his exchange, but on the spot his N recorded, was skeptical that such behavior of the temple. Recording defendant's statement as a donor shows that he purchased the suit from the donor, but was banned during the relevant time as a sales MU, therefore, the gift change was confirmed. Defendant further deposed that he did not deal with the donor, but that he purchased the suit land from another person, the suit land was owned by the donor, thus affecting the transaction with another person, rather than the donor. Wind. Was itself a poor salesman. The defendant did not prove the contents of any valid gift, ie the offer, acceptance and possession delivery suit was ordered.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
