Find a Lawyer

GHULAM HUSSAIN versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQ HUSSAIN

A. XLI, R 27 Additional Evidence Preparation The request under O XLI, R 27, CPC was rejected for the preparation of additional evidence. The certified copies were filed and so were the public records suit decided after about nine years and the appeal is pending since the documents were tried as additional evidence which was part of the public record. They were allowed to present additional evidence as there was no possibility of tampering. It was directed by the High Court with the Appellate Court to allow the preparation of the documents stated in the application and decide the appeal within a specified period.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009

• IRFAN KHAN v. State 2009 MLD 120
• Mst. MANZOORAN BIBI v. State 2009 PCrLJ 122
• OMAR FAROOQ v. VICE-CHANCELLOR, BAHA-UDDIN ZAKARIA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN 2009 CLC 122
• SHAUKAT ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary, Local Government 2009 PLD 124
• GUJRAT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE through President v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Commerce 2009 CLD 127
• MUSHTAQ HUSSAIN v. State 2009 MLD 127
• MUHAMMAD TUFAIL v. FAQIR MUHAMMAD 2009 PCrLJ 127
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN v. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY through Secretary (Works and Communications), Islamabad 2009 CLC 128

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2009 →

patent advocate from Jalozai lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes