Sections 6 and 13 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. XVIII, R17 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 of the Constitution Petition, dismissed the trial of a timely trial of witnesses for pre-arrest, but The appellate court ruled below. Trial and Trial to the Trial Court with respect to the right to settle the case and to the high value of the property market value in the trial case, and to present the plaintiff in a legal case. After remand, decide on a lease offset by law. The trial court, which relied on the evidence already entered, presented only two witnesses and closed the evidence, requesting the plaintiff to issue a directive to present and tender the evidence regarding the letters. Had dismissed, after filing a review against the judgment, the trial court directed the appellate judge to summon those witnesses for cross-examination, saying that they were affected by the final order constitutional petition. The plaintiff asserts that there is no statute of law for summoning witnesses for cross examination, and XVIII, R 17, CPC's legal status. Produced is clear that the court could call for any time, any witness examination or cross-examination. If examined earlier, the plaintiff was within his right to rely on the evidence already entered, but he could not refuse to allow his witnesses to contract with the defendants for cross-examination because a new situation has arisen and the defendant. Ali has a right to the examination of witnesses, which was requested by the Court of Appeal below. came
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2009
