Articles 42 and 54 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), OVII, R11 and Section 11 suits raised the preliminary objection to the rule of application of the Code of Conduct for the Declaration and Prohibition of Prohibition. Has been stopped by Race Judeta. The trial court, which had to dismiss, concluded that the question of implementation of OVII, R11, CPC, along with the Race Judiciary, could not be answered until the evidence was filed in this case and its The object is rejected. However, the trial court appealed, dismissing the trial court's order on appeal and dismissing the trial. Neither the preliminary issue was decided with regard to judicial justice, nor did the parties have the opportunity to lead the forecasts and contradictory evidence. Wanted to decide the case on the preliminary issue, he should make a preliminary issue in which the judiciary and the provisions of O VII, R 11, CPC apply. Dee should have sent the trial to the trial court to provide the parties with the opportunity to have leading evidence in support of their respective convictions; the brief that the appellate court had deduced was not in line with the established law. The appellate court was set aside and the trial court was restored, in which the trial court was instructed to record the instruction and to decide the merit in accordance with the law.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2009
