Find a Lawyer

BASHIR AHMED versus SHER DIN

XML, R 27, O XIII, R 2 and 5 115 of the original decrees of CPC Code XPL for the petitioner in favor of the plaintiff for the pre-emption of the Punjab Pre-Act Act (I 1913), Section 15 The petitioner did not submit a copy of the document, which was tried to be presented in evidence, nor did he rely on those defendants in the pleadings, as the appellant's additional evidence was excluded by the appellate court. Before which he did not give any reason for not copying the document in question. During the trial, the defendants filed an application under O XIII, R 2, CPC, seeking permission to present copies of certain documents to the court, with additional evidence which was approved by the trial court. Was used and discretion was used in favor of the court. Defendants who produced the required documents, presenting additional evidence at the trial, did not mention or present the document in question before the parties were to provide justice, before Theta and defendant Aliens have already taken advantage of the pleasures of the court in presenting additional evidence; they cannot be given another opportunity to deny the justice on the other hand. Reopen the case and allow the courts to reopen so that the matter remains pending, which has been pending since 1966, which requires that the opposing party's harassment be terminated and the proceedings must be allowed to reach the final and without any material bail. The District Judge of the Regulation exercised his jurisdiction. Hot has been identified lately Pakistan, top advocate family court from Washuk lawyer