A. XLI, R 27 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Articles 42, 39, 54 and 55, Plaintiffs Applicant by Cancellation of Trial Decision for Decision, Cancellation, Compulsory and Permanent Order Submission by Appellate Court Filed. The declaration, cancellation, mandatory and permanent injunction which was rejected by the trial court and an appeal was filed in which the petition was moved for the preparation of additional evidence, but the appellate court held that the petitioner's position was that the documents were relevant. And for a fair decision in this case, the Appellate Court may need to present any document or examine any witnesses so that they are able to make a decision or for additional evidence through additional evidence. Although the production of additional evidence for the purpose was generally not encouraged While some documents had a direct impact on the lease, the court could not close its eyes at any stage of the proceedings, permitting additional evidence was permissible in the documents in which the parent appeared and the plaintiffs' claims based on the parentage. Yes, the documents were relevant to establishing parents and sought to be presented by additional evidence containing income records. The plaintiffs will not fail in the applicant's evidence and will not set a new point. The High Court observed that such documents need to be appreciated. The review was accepted and the case was remanded to the appellate court.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014
