MRS. SHABINA AZIZ versus STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN
O XVI, R 1 (2) Limitation Act (IX of 1908) Section 3 Purpose and attendance of witnesses O XVI R 1 Purpose, scope and nature, list of witnesses, O XVI, R 1, provisions of CPC The non-submission was, in O XVI, R 1 (1), that the use of the word was banned, with the CPC prohibiting it with a prohibition that the party was included in the list. No one will be allowed to testify, except with the permission of the court. In order to summon witnesses from the court and obtain any relief in respect of attendance, a fixed period of XVI, R 1, CPC was necessary. It is well-aware of the potential evidence in the case that such a restriction can be accomplished. If convicted of immunity, the parties will surprise each other by presenting witnesses and documents in evidence. On the issue of failure to list the witnesses, a legal right was filed in favor of the opposing party which was. Even if a party has evidence, such evidence will not be used by the party to whom it has evidence, stating that the limitation was similar to the parties' rights under section 3 of the RTI Act, 1908. The rights are protected, but the evidence cited may be known by the evidence. Be available, but its effect was banned seven days after the case was presented by the court, not only by the guilty party, but also by the court. For this reason, the applicant was required to explain the delay at the same time. The disclosure of the witness's name will preclude the party from failing to explain such a delay and
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
