For the clause 42, the plaintiff agreed to the second marriage agreement to be the plaintiff's first wife, which contained some of the terms and conditions of the agreement. The defendant acknowledged that the agreement was a fraudulent and manipulative document. As well as the legal evidence which was denied, the plaintiff was subjected to cross-examination by the plaintiff but nothing could be excluded from it. Through coherent and convincing evidence it was proved that the plaintiff was entitled to receive the property and Shares in other defendants' salaries and pensions need not be proved as mentioned in the facts, nothing to prove the costs incurred by the plaintiff allegedly on the marriage of his daughters The record was not brought by the plaintiff's husband was unsuccessful in proving the payment of restitution The plaintiff's wife for whom he was bound by the terms and conditions of the contract of execution was hanged in 1994 and the defendant retained the defendant until 2007. The relationship between the parties was strained after 2007 and was subsequently triggered by the plaintiff's wife. will come. I am responsible for making claims about the properties mentioned in the process in the case of a stress relationship between spouses. For the purpose of demarcation, calculations will be made from the year 2007. There was a written assurance from one party to the other party to perform the contractual duties. Signatures of a particular timely execution and minor witnesses were properly accepted for the proceedings in favor of which
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
