59/2022 R.A (Civil Revision) Muhammad Bux through Lrs. (Applicant) V/S Wali Muhammad & Ors. (Respondent)

Sindh High Court2025

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Hasan (Akber)(Author)

Share on WhatsApp
59/2022 R.A (Civil Revision) Muhammad Bux through Lrs. (Applicant) V/S Wali Muhammad & Ors. (Respondent) Sindh High Court Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Hasan (Akber)(Author) Order Date: 21-FEB-25 a "relevant" and "admissible" fact, is admitted as a piece of evidence, only when the same has been proved by the party; Article 79 QSO mandatorily requires proof of document to be attested, and shall not be used as evidence until two attesting witnesses have been examined; Exclusion to this rule has been provided only with respect to those registered documents which are admitted; in matters pertaining to financial or future obligations, an instrument if reduced to writing, shall be attested by two men or one man and two women; mere assertion of death of marginal witness would not discharge the burden of a party; Simply alleging that a witness has died or cannot be found, would not assuage the burden to locate and produce him; if no effort was made to prove death of the witness, strong presumption of withholding best evidence would be drawn against such party as entailed under Article 29(g) of the QSO; even for those registered documents which have been challenged, the exercise of proof of document through marginal witnesses is to be mandatorily complied with, and no statutory presumption could be attached to it; power of Court under Order XIV Rule 15 CPC can be exercised at any stage prior to the final disposal of the case; parties are also under duty to make application for amendment or correction of Issues settled by the Court; section 115 CPC confers an exceptional and necessary power intended to secure effective exercise of its superintendence and visitorial powers of correction, unhindered by technicalities; Article 117 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 requires the primary burden to prove a fact on such person, who asserts such fact
Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

Red Notices against Foreign National Proclaimed Offender

PLJ 2024 Karachi 138 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2024

Judgment on Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act 2012

PLJ 2023 Karachi 124 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2023

Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2013 explained in a Judgment

PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 154 · Sindh High Court · 2022

Article 140- Cross Examination of a Witness

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020

Re-Examination is more important than Examination in Chief

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020