11. From the perusal of the contents of the record it is
crystal clear that respondent No.2 failed to crossexamine the plaintiff about the entries of Nikah-Nama, it
is well established principle of law that when a person
fails to cross-examine the witness on specific portion, it
would be considered to admitting his statement as
correct. Reference in this regard can be made to “ZAFAR
IQBAL v IMTIAZ HUSSAIN PHULPOTO” (1986 MLD 2001), “LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, WAPDA SCARP-VI,
RAHIMYAR KHAN and another v QURESH MUHAMMAD
and 17 others” (1990 MLD 2123) and “REHMAN ULLAH v
WAZIRZADA” (2011 YLR 3045). Thus, in the case in hand
respondent No.2 could not properly substantiate the
contents of the Nikah and as such the learned appellate
court arbitrarily acted in the matter while modifying the
judgment without getting through every inch and aspect
of the case
Part Of Judgment
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition-Family-Dowry Articles
6399-13
2017 LHC 505
0 comments:
Post a Comment