Articles 6 and 13 were made in favor of the plaintiff to the extent of half of the trial for trial, while the appellate court dismissed the decision and order of the trial, and the claimant's favor in favor of the plaintiff. Claim deleted. That the Patwari constituency had informed him of the sale transaction, but said that the Patwari appearing in the case had not stated anything about the plaintiff's alleged molestation, it did not prove. That is, in the circumstances the plaintiff did not mention in the plaintiff, making the settlement was a significant step in the time and place that the pre-impeachment took and it was important that as soon as the pre-emptor vacated the property. Had acquired knowledge of the sale, urgent demand for it; and according to the terms of section 13 (2) of the Pre-Impression Act of 1987, the West Frontier Province e maautb intended to emphasize the efficiency of service delivery to their right to self-determination without wasting a moment, had imposed a legal obligation on former amptr. According to the terms of Section 13 of the North West Frontier Province Pre-Impression Act, 1987, the preaching of Talab, as soon as possible, was fatal to the location, date and time of the meeting. In the present case, maintaining the pre-conviction case stated that the requirements were not met and that the appellate court did not prove it, in the absence of anything illegal under the circumstances, misrepresentation of evidence or scope of evidence. In the error, the appeal against the judgment of the Appellate Court of Appeal was dismissed
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2010
