Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Suit No. 89 of 1972, decided on 16th April 1980.
‑‑ Ss. 91 & 92‑Document, contradiction of terms of‑Documents forming basis of claims alleged by defendant to have been given to plaintiff on his misrepresentation to avail of facility of overdraft from any Bank and same having never been intended to be acted upon‑No Bank having possibly advanced loan on basis of certificate'/ acknowledgment of a private limited Company affirming its liability to pay certain amount to holder of certificate/acknowledgment, plea, held, not plausible ‑Defendant not serving any notice on plaintiff, prior to institution of suit by plaintiff, alleging such certificate/ document having been obtained on misrepresentation or same having not been intended to be acted upon, plea, held further, an after thought‑Plea as to misrepresentation having not been accepted Ss. 91 & 92, Evidence Act, 1872, held still further, not applicable to case and oral evidence could not be produced in contradiction of terms of document in question.
Muhammad Akbar Khan v. Sultan Ghani and others 1970 S C M R 696 ; Syed Riaz Ali v. Shabbir Ahmed Khan 1971 S C M tai 598 and West Pakistan Industrial Development Corporation v. Fateh Textile Mills Ltd. P L D 1968 Kar. 812 ref.
S. A. Sarwana for Plaintiff.
S. M. Sadiq and Hussain Adil Khatri for Defendants.
Date of hearing: 16th April 1980.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer