A. VII, R 2 & O IX, R 13 Qunun e Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts 17 and 79 The defendant sued for recovery of the contract based on the agreement refusing to execute this agreement on 21 21 2005. Plaintiff's evidence of Ali's absence resulted in the passing of the former party decree in 2005, 94. After examining a minor witness in the contract, the defendant filed a separate order in 20 6 2005 Instead of petition 21 21 2005, he erroneously noted 11 4 2005 as to the date of the hearing, on what date did he find out that the appellate court had dismissed such application by the trial court? Former He learned of the decree, and amended the error by the High Court about the date of the hearing, whether it was due to misconduct by a party or by some other clerk intentionally wrong Communication could not be excluded from the scope of wrongdoing in court. The court official was on the alert and was inquiring about the proceedings from all relevant constituencies as the contents of his application clearly indicate that the plaintiff's error on the hearing date was very good. Because such a request was legally upheld by her affidavit and the plaintiffs could not comply. Deny it even in response to the request The possibility of noting the wrong date in such circumstances cannot be ruled out. Such a misrepresentation of the defendant will be sufficient to restore the case unless it is practiced to some extent. Difficulties The following courts should exercise discretion in favor of the defendant
