Find a Lawyer

GOVERNMENT OF SIND versus AMIR MUHAMMAD

Contract Act 1872 Section 73 Laws in the evidence (10 of 1984), Arts 31 and 118 Agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant. Following the initial commencement of work by the plaintiff, the operation was stopped by the plaintiff and shortly after the plaintiff's action was taken to finely process, namely, cutting down trees that were either falling or falling. Resumed work by the plaintiff with a notice by the department demanding payment of fines for the cutting of protected trees. The plaintiff denied the facts of illegally cutting the protected trees, however, the plaintiff's son, who was his Acting as an agent, he acknowledged in one of his letters, the fact of cutting a certain number of trees. In effect, such defendant did not review any witnesses to prove the contents of a letter and to prove that the trees were cut down by the defendant's son, defendant, according to the facts. Had failed to prove the fact that such plaintiff had cut down the trees illegally. From the protected area and consequently was obliged to pay the fine as demanded in the notice, most of the defendants could be detained, the plaintiff's son confessed to the excessive value, but his There was no evidence from the side as demanding a certain amount of money was not legal and could not be received as a liability. property advocates from Ugoki lawyer