O XIV, Rr. 1, 3 and 5 of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), for the 42nd Trial, the trial court's issue of the jurisdictional affirmation affirming the disposition of the variation. I was not used to intelligence. The party was not formed and the parties failed to prove their claims by presenting evidence of XX, 1, 3 and 5, the CPC was disregarded and the parties listed in the investigation filed by the courts below. The real conflict between them was a lack of commitment. Was bound to decide the appropriate matters that were not done and the actual question of the facts remained disputed and both the court orders suffered irregularities and illegal proceedings, before the illegal alteration of the suit landowners' own free and Was not in the joint capacity. Instead, the Shimalat Deh Pathadarshan of Shimlat Dih was also required to be implemented as a party which was not implemented as a party in the present case. Was set aside and the trial was remanded to the trial court, which, in accordance with the law, accepted the review of the circumstances after the new verdict.
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2014
