Find a Lawyer

DAUD SHAH versus WARIS SHAH

The material contradictions between the statement of the pre-emptor and his witness for the termination of the section 13 lawsuit The Scope pre-emptor stated in his statement that when he was notified of the alleged sale of the suit property, he returned to the court premises of his house. I was sitting with my family. According to his testimony, when the witness stated in his statement that he told his family about the alleged sale while he was sitting alone in his room, such a contradiction could not be termed a material contradiction. This may affect the problem. The right to make the Tulbus on the pre-emptor informing the witness regarding the date, place and time was not a dispute, accordingly the appeal was allowed.

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2014

• ORYA MAQBOOL ABBASI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Establishment 2014 SCMR 817
• A. QUTUBUDDIN KHAN v. CHEC MILLWALA DREDGING CO. (PVT.) LIMITED 2014 CLD 824
• FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary v. SULTAN AHMAD SHAMS 2014 PLC(CS) 831
• GHULAM ABBAS v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence 2014 SCMR 849
• UNITED BANK LTD. v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2014 SCMR 856
• MUNAWAR IQBAL GONDAL v. Mrs. NASIRA IQBAL 2014 SCMR 860
• MAULA JAN v. State 2014 SCMR 862
• HAKIM ALI v. MUHAMMAD HANIF 2014 SCMR 866

All Supreme Court judgments of 2014 →

patent advocate from Vehari lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes