Section 8 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), during the Section 11 suit race justice document for possession of immovable property, while defendants claimed that they owned property up to 72 kNal through a contract to sell the suit. The trial court ruled that, but the appellate court dismissed it, the reason for the proceedings between the parties in the previous case was not uniform. As was the case in the latter case in relation to the specific performance of the sales contract, the present one was about Mason's profit, which could not be termed a decisive issue and no matter in relation to its use in the previous suit. No evidence was made nor was the evidence prepared by the parties in this regard. The previous case was in respect of 72 kanals, while the present order was in respect of 179 kanal of land. Appeal was granted in favor of Ali but no court ruled on this property. Was not obliged to give conclusions about the property review which was claimed by the plaintiff and the trial court ruled. The Syed court was again unable to settle the case in relation to the appeal of the judiciary which was raised earlier, the appellate court's decision was set aside and a remand was sought for the decision of the case. Conditions
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014
