AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN THROUGH ATTORNEY versus KHALID AZIZ MALIK
Section 18 Laws On the Evidence (10 of 1984), Arts 17 (2) (a) and 79 mini-decrees, the object of the sale of the mortgaged house is to make the owner of any part of the house on the basis of an oral gift by the decision-maker. Claiming that the bank's evidence could not be gifted was not the signature of the minor witnesses on the gift deed presented by the objection. The implementation date was changed by overwriting. That a phrase was included between the lines in relation to the delivery of the occupied gift house. It was written on plain paper. The same contradictory applicant's claim that the gift was made orally because the donor intended to make a gift through such work. He spoke of the gift of the whole house, while some of it was sold through a registered sale deed prior to the gift process. He was the victim of uncertainty even when not explaining the moving part of the house. And that the signatures of the decision makers / executors did not match and did not match their signatures on the documents on record and were silent on the request of the objection that the name, time, date and The name was unacceptable in the name of gifts, the evidence of the unconfirmed evidence of the two witnesses, the objector filed the sole objection to defeating the order and depriving the decree holder of an undisclosed amount of money and In the cases, the High Court dismissed the petitioner's request. \ r \ n
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
