Section 9 legal evidence (10 of 1984), Article 76 suits scope for the specific performance of the contract for the incorporation of the secondary evidence deprived the plaintiff of the actual action / agreement on the occasion of the suit for specific performance of the contract. The petitioner filed an application for permission to include secondary evidence was granted by the petitioner / defendant through the trial court to present the secondary evidence, enjoined by the trial court's order, claiming that the plaintiff Is not entitled to permission to add secondary evidence, and so the trial court's ruling finds legal weakness I've had. The plaintiff had filed a claim in his favor for specific performance of a work. There is a hint of action / agreement in the whole case of the plaintiff, which was the dependent document in support of his claim, if that is not proved by the plaintiff in this case, the circumstances in which the secondary evidence was refused to be presented. Because the petitioner's objection was premature, the stand will have to face cross-examination on the contrary side of the process and further approval of the process or legal status will be determined by the court on a merit at a later stage. Inappropriate order was unreasonable
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014
