Applicants for leave to grant SSC 9, 10 and 22 suit guarantees for debt collection claimed that the defendant had obtained financing through the lease through another defendant's personal guarantee. The leave request to defend the case was dismissed and the case was dismissed The defendant's confession was that he never signed a bail in favor of the borrower. The defendant's claim was confirmed by the plaintiff's bail guarantee and compensation lawyer, in which the defendant's signature was acknowledged by him. The issue, however, was that such signatures were obtained as separate pieces of evidence from the witnesses, especially because of the two signatures of the witnesses present there, while the defendant's The signatures that were recognized were identified for execution, i.e. the guarantor claimant. Was in the medical profession, was not an illiterate person, no defense was presented to the trial, the application for leave to the defense was rightly dismissed and the trial court properly intervened in the case and No appeal was filed for illegality, appeal was rejected by High Court
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
