Find a Lawyer

ALTAF HUSSAIN SAJID versus MUHAMMAD ARIF

Recovery of money based on O XXXVII, R2 Negotiable Devices Act (XXVI 1881), Section 4 Stamp Act (II of 1899), Sections 2 (5) (b) and (20) The care of the suit witnesses was signed by the plaintiff (its maker) in such document, which was an unconditional action to pay some money to the plaintiff or his order, in such document the Stamp Act , All the conditions set forth by section 2 (20) of 1899 were met, thus read with section 4 of the Conversation Tool Act 1881. There was no bond within the meaning of section 2 (5) (b) of the Document Stamp Act, 1899, that the nature of such document by the witnesses could not change its nature nor lose its significance, Because as a negotiation tool in the sense of OXXIII, CPC was able to retain the suit. The basis for the principles of such documentation best advocate from Chakwal lawyer