A. VII, R 11, O II, R 2 & Section 11 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) The dismissal of section 42 and 54 of the case scope jurisdiction, for the declaration of the applicable scope suit's principle that the claimant has no right to the said property Were owners. It has been claimed that the defendants should be prevented from interfering with the same plaintiff, and on the basis of race judiciary on the application filed under R11CPC, it was claimed that the claim was made by the defendants' predecessors. That is, a previous lawsuit has been filed in relation to the suit property. The plaintiffs believed that the previous case was in relation to a portion of the entire joint estate and that the present case could not be dismissed without recording the evidence. In the trial of accuracy, the parties were not given the opportunity to record the supporting and contradictory evidence to establish the claim. Resolving the matter and retaining such opportunities for both parties to demonstrate their choice was not sustainable in the eyes of the law. Setting aside the controversial order of the trial court, the trial court was directed to record pro and contradictory evidence in connection with the dispute of the judiciary and the case and decide the application under Order VII, R 11, CPC Was allowed to modify merit
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014
