Find a Lawyer

NASEEM AHMED versus USMAN

Civil Procedure Code Order XVII A XVII, R 3 and Section 115 exclude the filing for non-production of evidence while deciding the case under OXVII, R 3, CPC as well as considering the decision of the case. So consider the merits of this matter. The record, which can contain any evidence ever recorded or the documents kept on the record and the parties' requests, repeatedly demanded adjournment after the plaintiffs had settled the case and even failed to summon these witnesses. Whose names appeared in the list of witnesses. The plaintiff's own subsequent behavior shows that he was refraining from proceeding with the case and was merely intending to harass, however, when the court concluded that the defendant had changed his style. The process made it impossible for the court to proceed. The continuation of the trial and the proceedings were to harass the defendants only. In this case, the conduct of the plaintiff justifies the procedure adopted by the trial court. What is certain is that he did not comply with the trial court's order under which the costs of deferment were imposed. Interference with the conclusions of the courts below in dismissing plaintiffs' cases list of supreme court advocates from Muzaffargarh lawyer