Section 13 and 14 law testimony (10 of 1984), Article 129 (g) demand for students, performance by lawyers and the effect of the non-presentation of the pre-emptor were simultaneously ordered that the defendant's confession was not It was alleged that the plaintiff had filed his case. In order to prove the students correct, the best evidence in regard to the performance of the affidavit was that the person who made the aforesaid pool would prove to be deadly for the premature death of the plaintiff who did not appear in the court. I was born skeptical. In the circumstances, the best evidence of the co-ordinator's performance was withheld and was not presented. In special circumstances the pre-emptor could appoint a lawyer for the student's performance. Neither a lawyer nor the plaintiff's witness testified There is no reason why he did not appear in the witness box. The attorney did not mention the reason for the absence of the umpire. The attorney did not have the authority to execute the plaintiff's behalf on behalf of the plaintiff. Action 14 of the KP Pre-Empty Act 1987 will be available only if the pre-emptor is unable to make a demand and has a reasonable cause for non-presentation, it may be due to minority, illness or any other disability but the same should be requested. Should. In fact or the law may be disturbed if a judicial jurisdiction, illegal or irregularity order is encountered and the decisions of the following two courts are kept separate and the case dismissed, the case is accepted for review. Goes
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014
