Find a Lawyer

KHURSHID BEGUM versus CHIRAGH MUHAMMAD

Law Evidence Order 1984 Article 76 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 12 Contracting Proof of Documents Selling Documents for Secondary Evidence for Specific Performance of the Contract To guide the plaintiff in the proof of sale and receipt of his contract Was granted In connection with the payment of arrears, on his request that the original be lost, he is allowed to present secondary evidence along with evidence of the original documents being lost, however the appellate court's decision based on the secondary evidence of the plaintiff's case. It was heard, set such an order on the basis that the plaintiff did not deserve the High Court order if the original document was not proved, so this court appointed the appellate court order that the preliminary proceedings of the litigation In the meantime, the original court's decision to question the original documents was a waste. After reaching the deadline, could not be reopened, the original document was able to understand that the point of allowing secondary evidence had been finalized due to alleged original loss of documents, However, the preliminary ruling of the reviewing court revealed that evidence and secondary evidence relating to the loss of original documents may be presented simultaneously. But the former had to know later. It further stated that secondary evidence would be pointless if the documents were not proved harmless, so the appellate court's finding was correct, while the decision of the appellate court was not restored while the high court was restored while the high court found the circumstances. I was separated. ask a advocate free from Hafizabad lawyer