Find a Lawyer

JEHANGIR KHAN versus CHAIRMAN, WAPDA

Limitation Act 1908 Article 37 Circle Pakistan (1973), Article 185 suit for damages claim of the plaintiffs but the appellant, dismissed by the High Court in the appeal, did not claim that he was the owner of the water claim for damages in question. The premise was not given by the plaintiff in the plaintiff The defendant was unable to base any of his claims on the plaintiffs' claim that his claim was based on ease The High Court, in such an event, rightly found it That the case was in accordance with Article 37, Limitation Act, 1908, in the absence of clear evidence that the water supply was allegedly by the defendants. Has reduced the traditional ease. The result of the authority's action (by expanding the water cover to accommodate the flood water) resulted in the plaintiff's alleged damages, her claims, which are based solely on speculation. Correctly rejected the evidence, the High Court examined the evidence, there was no violation of any principle regarding the definition of the evidence, the search of the record and the conclusions reached by the High Court. For good reasons to guarantee any interference immigration advocate from Jaffarabad lawyer