Find a Lawyer

ABDUL QADOOS versus HABIBUR REHMAN

Article 4 (185 ()) of the Convention of the Martyrs (of 1984 of ten), Arts-7 for leave to appeal and fact-finding facts sought by the courts of the petitioner. The burden was too great on the applicant to show that the findings obtained by the courts from the cohesion of the facts were not durable when the court agreed that the court's finding was fully reasonable and satisfied that the courts. Did not interfere with the finding of the facts recorded by the preliminary courts or the High Court. None of the accepted principles related to the provision of any law or definition of evidence was reached, no one was found to be illegal or weak in the present case, and the decision passed by the High Court and the courts gave full proof of equality. Was thoroughly tested and came to this conclusion. There is no evidence of misunderstanding or misreading on the record nor any weaknesses involved in the dispute. The facts were identified under challenge in the decision so that there was no specific question of law of public importance. Therefore, the Supreme Court refused to interfere in the High Court's decision.

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2010

• SHAHID ALI v. Mrs. AZIZ FATIMA 2010 PLD 38
• PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION v. S.M. ISMAIL NAQVI 2010 SCMR 42
• SHAKEEL v. State 2010 PLD 47
• Mst. JINDO MAI v. MUHAMMAD BAKHSH 2010 SCMR 48
• MAJEED v. State 2010 SCMR 55
• CHIEF JUSTICE OF PAKISTAN IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY v. PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary 2010 PLD 61
• THE STATE through Director-General, Anti-Narcotics Force, Rawalpindi v. ABDUL GHANI 2010 SCMR 61
• ADREES AHMAD v. ZAFAR ALI 2010 SCMR 64

All Supreme Court judgments of 2010 →

patent advocate from Dhoun Kal lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes