EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASESEVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES

Mian Ali HaiderMian Ali HaiderL.L.B., L.L.M (L.L.B., L.L.M (Cum LaudeCum Laude) U.K.) U.K.

SESSION TRAILSESSION TRAIL

Articles 117 to 129 of 1984 OrderArticles 117 to 129 of 1984 Order Relationship of Art. 117 & 118Relationship of Art. 117 & 118 Articles 119,122,125,126,127,128,129 – their significance in Articles 119,122,125,126,127,128,129 – their significance in

the context of civil cases?the context of civil cases?

– Relationship between burden of proof and presumptions Relationship between burden of proof and presumptions

– In civil cases, burden of proof keeps on shifting In civil cases, burden of proof keeps on shifting

– As used in Articles 117 and 118 As used in Articles 117 and 118

– Its relation with right to begin Its relation with right to begin Standard of proof in civil cases: is preponderance , but even in Standard of proof in civil cases: is preponderance , but even in

civil cases, the standard ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ may applycivil cases, the standard ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ may apply

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BURDEN OF PROOF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONSAND PRESUMPTIONS

Onus of Proof!Onus of Proof! When a plaintiff comes to court and asks for certain When a plaintiff comes to court and asks for certain

relief on the basis of certain facts.relief on the basis of certain facts. The onus of proof of those facts has to be on him, for The onus of proof of those facts has to be on him, for

the relief prayed for cannot be granted unless the court the relief prayed for cannot be granted unless the court is able to hold the existence of those facts proved is able to hold the existence of those facts proved

But the law makes provision for certain presumptions But the law makes provision for certain presumptions and any party on whom a burden is cast may shift the and any party on whom a burden is cast may shift the onus of proving any fact to the other party by showing onus of proving any fact to the other party by showing that fact should be presumed to exist.that fact should be presumed to exist.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BURDEN OF PROOF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONSAND PRESUMPTIONS

Articles of QSO should be read as subject to Articles of QSO should be read as subject to these presumptions.these presumptions.

Rules as to rebuttable presumption are no Rules as to rebuttable presumption are no more than rules as to burden of proof when the more than rules as to burden of proof when the court presumes the existence of fact, the court presumes the existence of fact, the burden of proving its existence is on the burden of proving its existence is on the parties that asserts its non existence.parties that asserts its non existence.

Conversely, when the burden of proving the Conversely, when the burden of proving the fact is on a particular party, the court is fact is on a particular party, the court is presuming its non existence. presuming its non existence.

WHAT IS BURDEN OF PROOF?WHAT IS BURDEN OF PROOF? BOF on the pleadings should not be confused with the burden BOF on the pleadings should not be confused with the burden

of adducing evidence.of adducing evidence. Which is described as “shifting”. The BOP on the pleadings Which is described as “shifting”. The BOP on the pleadings

never shifts, it always remains constant.never shifts, it always remains constant. The initial burden of proving up The initial burden of proving up pima facie pima facie case in his favour case in his favour

is cast on the plaintiff; when he gives such evidence as will is cast on the plaintiff; when he gives such evidence as will support a prima facie case, the onus shifts on the defendant to support a prima facie case, the onus shifts on the defendant to adduce the rebutting evidence to meet the case made out by adduce the rebutting evidence to meet the case made out by the plaintiff.the plaintiff.

As the case continue to develop, the onus may shift back again As the case continue to develop, the onus may shift back again to the plaintiff.to the plaintiff.

It is not easy to decide at what particular stage in the course of It is not easy to decide at what particular stage in the course of the evidence the onus shifts from one side to the other.the evidence the onus shifts from one side to the other.

BURDEN OF PROOFBURDEN OF PROOF

When after the entire evidence is adduced, the When after the entire evidence is adduced, the court feels it cannot make up its mind as to court feels it cannot make up its mind as to which of the version is true.which of the version is true.

It will hold that party on whom the burden lies It will hold that party on whom the burden lies has not discharged the burden; has not discharged the burden;

But if it has on the evidence no difficulty in But if it has on the evidence no difficulty in arriving at a definite conclusion, than the BOP arriving at a definite conclusion, than the BOP on the pleadings recedes into the background.on the pleadings recedes into the background.

ONUS OF PROOFONUS OF PROOF

The question of onus of proof loose its importance The question of onus of proof loose its importance when relevant evidence has been adduced and placed when relevant evidence has been adduced and placed on the record.on the record.

This question becomes material only where the court This question becomes material only where the court finds the evidence so evenly balanced that it can finds the evidence so evenly balanced that it can come to no definite conclusion.come to no definite conclusion.

In such scenario, the rule is that the party on whom In such scenario, the rule is that the party on whom the onus lay must fail.the onus lay must fail.

But where evidence has been lead by both sides and But where evidence has been lead by both sides and considered, the question of onus loose its importance.considered, the question of onus loose its importance.

BOP IN CIVIL & CRIMINAL CASESBOP IN CIVIL & CRIMINAL CASES

In general, the rules of evidence in civil & criminal In general, the rules of evidence in civil & criminal cases are the same, but some provisions in QSO are cases are the same, but some provisions in QSO are peculiar to criminal and other peculiar to civil cases. peculiar to criminal and other peculiar to civil cases. (117 and 118)(117 and 118)

Whereas, a civil case a mere prepodenerence of Whereas, a civil case a mere prepodenerence of probability is sufficient base for the decisionprobability is sufficient base for the decision

However, in a criminal case persuations of guilt must However, in a criminal case persuations of guilt must amount to such a moral certainty as convenience the amount to such a moral certainty as convenience the mind of the court beyond all reasonable doubt.mind of the court beyond all reasonable doubt.

BOP IN CIVIL & CRIMINAL CASESBOP IN CIVIL & CRIMINAL CASES

In criminal case no weight of preponderant In criminal case no weight of preponderant evidence is sufficient, short of that which evidence is sufficient, short of that which excludes all reasonable doubt. The party excludes all reasonable doubt. The party accused is entitled to the benefit of the leagl accused is entitled to the benefit of the leagl presumptions in favour of innocence, and in presumptions in favour of innocence, and in doubtful cases that may suffice to turn the doubtful cases that may suffice to turn the scale in his favour.scale in his favour.

This rule has a prudence has infact attained the This rule has a prudence has infact attained the force of law founded on the public policy.force of law founded on the public policy.

READING MATERIALREADING MATERIAL

Sardar Bibi – PLD 1954 Lah 480, 483  Sardar Bibi – PLD 1954 Lah 480, 483  Lakshmanna – AIR 1949 PC 278, 285 Lakshmanna – AIR 1949 PC 278, 285 Muhammad Ibrahim – 1980 CLC 296  Muhammad Ibrahim – 1980 CLC 296  Zakaullah – 1991 SCMR 2126, 2133 Zakaullah – 1991 SCMR 2126, 2133 Rashid Ahmed Khan – PLD 1994 SC Rashid Ahmed Khan – PLD 1994 SC

3636

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCEDOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE With the ever-increasing amount of documentary material With the ever-increasing amount of documentary material

coming before the courts it is of great importance to provide a coming before the courts it is of great importance to provide a clear definition of a document‖ for the purposes of admitting clear definition of a document‖ for the purposes of admitting these as documentary evidence. these as documentary evidence.

The relative position of a given piece of evidence will be greatly The relative position of a given piece of evidence will be greatly affected should it not fall within the definition of a document. affected should it not fall within the definition of a document. – The basic unit of documentary evidence, The basic unit of documentary evidence,

the document‖ itself, the document‖ itself, therefore requires detailed investigationtherefore requires detailed investigation . .

With the growth and expansion of what has now come to be With the growth and expansion of what has now come to be accepted as a document‖, it is important to examine how it has accepted as a document‖, it is important to examine how it has evolved beyond the traditional paper product to incorporate evolved beyond the traditional paper product to incorporate different media different media

THE “DOCUMENT” AT COMMON LAW THE “DOCUMENT” AT COMMON LAW The concept of a document for the purposes of English The concept of a document for the purposes of English

common law was described in 1908 by Darling J in common law was described in 1908 by Darling J in R v R v Daye1 as comprising Daye1 as comprising

““any written thing capable of being evidenceany written thing capable of being evidence”.”. This embodied the long established 18th century view of This embodied the long established 18th century view of

a documentary record as an instrument; a documentary record as an instrument;

a thing, capable of conveying evidence. a thing, capable of conveying evidence. This also attempted to instil the definition with a certain This also attempted to instil the definition with a certain

degree of longevity by not assigning an unduly degree of longevity by not assigning an unduly prescriptive definition to the term ―document. prescriptive definition to the term ―document.

““DOCUMENT” AT QSODOCUMENT” AT QSO

"Document" means any matter expressed or "Document" means any matter expressed or described upon any substance by means of described upon any substance by means of letters, figures orletters, figures or

marks, or by more than one of those means, marks, or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, for intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purpose recording that matter;the purpose recording that matter;

ADDITION’s IN “DOCUMENT” ADDITION’s IN “DOCUMENT” ARE STILL GOING ONARE STILL GOING ON

At common law, therefore, a document was described as anything At common law, therefore, a document was described as anything upon which information could be visibly inscribed with upon which information could be visibly inscribed with recognisable and legible characters. recognisable and legible characters.

The object or medium upon which these characters were inscribed The object or medium upon which these characters were inscribed was itself unimportant so long as it was intelligible and was itself unimportant so long as it was intelligible and information could be gleaned from it by the human eye information could be gleaned from it by the human eye

This did not anticipate the advent of computer disks or other This did not anticipate the advent of computer disks or other modern information storage devices, and so the ongoing modern information storage devices, and so the ongoing development of technological innovation therefore required development of technological innovation therefore required significant adjustment to the common law definition of a significant adjustment to the common law definition of a “document”. “document”.

This view was judicially endorsed by the Supreme Court in 1979 in This view was judicially endorsed by the Supreme Court in 1979 in McCarthy v McCarthy v O'Flynn, to the effect that “a document is something which teaches or gives O'Flynn, to the effect that “a document is something which teaches or gives

information or a lesson or an example of construction”information or a lesson or an example of construction”

The most recent legislative definition of a document The most recent legislative definition of a document is contained in the is contained in the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Act 2009 which defines a document as ―including: Act 2009 which defines a document as ―including: – any book, record or other written or printed material in any any book, record or other written or printed material in any

form, and form, and

– any recording, including any data or information any recording, including any data or information stored, maintained or preserved electronically or stored, maintained or preserved electronically or otherwise than in legible form.otherwise than in legible form.

164. Production of evidence that has become 164. Production of evidence that has become available because of modern devices, etc.: available because of modern devices, etc.:

In such cases as the Court may consider appropriate, In such cases as the Court may consider appropriate, the Court may allow to be produced any evidence that the Court may allow to be produced any evidence that may have become available because of modern may have become available because of modern devices or techniques.devices or techniques.

AUTHENTICATIONAUTHENTICATION Authenticity is an aspect of relevance. Unless a document Authenticity is an aspect of relevance. Unless a document

is authentic - that is, unless it was written by its supposed is authentic - that is, unless it was written by its supposed author and is genuinely what it purports or is asserted to author and is genuinely what it purports or is asserted to be - it is, in most cases, irrelevant.be - it is, in most cases, irrelevant.

The requirement to demonstrate the authenticity of a The requirement to demonstrate the authenticity of a document is related to the requirement to identify and document is related to the requirement to identify and show the relevance of items of real evidence. show the relevance of items of real evidence.

The obligation may be satisfied in many different ways The obligation may be satisfied in many different ways depending on the kind of document, the purpose for depending on the kind of document, the purpose for which it is adduced and the evidence available. which it is adduced and the evidence available.

Methods of authentication include testimony of an author Methods of authentication include testimony of an author or a person who saw the author sign the document, and or a person who saw the author sign the document, and testimony of a handwriting experttestimony of a handwriting expert

Authenticity is not the only aspect of relevance. E.g., Authenticity is not the only aspect of relevance. E.g., the content of the document must also have some the content of the document must also have some

connection with the case. However, the authenticity connection with the case. However, the authenticity aspects of relevance require special attention as they are aspects of relevance require special attention as they are at present governed by an admissibility rule which at present governed by an admissibility rule which operates in addition to the relevance ruleoperates in addition to the relevance rule

Authentication as an aspect of relevance and a Authentication as an aspect of relevance and a requirement of admissibility. requirement of admissibility.

Authenticity may, however, remain in dispute even Authenticity may, however, remain in dispute even though it is sufficiently established to allow a document though it is sufficiently established to allow a document to be received in evidence. to be received in evidence.

Other aspects of authenticity not solely related to Other aspects of authenticity not solely related to admissibility (including the use of presumptions to admissibility (including the use of presumptions to facilitate authentication)facilitate authentication)

THE COMMON LAW THE COMMON LAW ADMISSIBILITY RULEADMISSIBILITY RULE

Many documents indicate their authenticity on their Many documents indicate their authenticity on their face. Letters, memoranda, file notes, and other common face. Letters, memoranda, file notes, and other common documents will often indicate who wrote them, who documents will often indicate who wrote them, who received them, when they were produced and other received them, when they were produced and other information demonstrating authenticity. information demonstrating authenticity.

However, the common law rule of admissibility However, the common law rule of admissibility requires that before a document is received in evidence requires that before a document is received in evidence its authenticity must be shown by evidence extrinsicits authenticity must be shown by evidence extrinsic to to the document itself. the document itself.

The indications on the face of the document are not on The indications on the face of the document are not on their own regarded as sufficient to demonstrate the their own regarded as sufficient to demonstrate the authenticity aspects of relevance.authenticity aspects of relevance.

This rule is little discussed in Commonwealth textbooks, though it is This rule is little discussed in Commonwealth textbooks, though it is comprehensively dealt with in United States texts. comprehensively dealt with in United States texts.

In UK the operation of the rule is seen in the requirement that documents In UK the operation of the rule is seen in the requirement that documents which are not part of an agreed bundle must be introduced through a which are not part of an agreed bundle must be introduced through a witness who testifies to the authenticity of the document.witness who testifies to the authenticity of the document.

The rule imposes, as a precondition of admissibility, a requirement The rule imposes, as a precondition of admissibility, a requirement additional to the demonstration of relevance. additional to the demonstration of relevance.

The question which arises is whether there is any policy reason for this rule The question which arises is whether there is any policy reason for this rule to continueto continue

in the United States, the rule has caused real injustice. In in the United States, the rule has caused real injustice. In Keegan v Green Keegan v Green Giant Co the plaintiff sued in respect of illness resulting from Giant Co the plaintiff sued in respect of illness resulting from eating peas eating peas from a can labelled with the defendant's name. from a can labelled with the defendant's name.

The court would not admit the label because there was no independent The court would not admit the label because there was no independent authenticating evidence indicating who had produced or distributed the authenticating evidence indicating who had produced or distributed the can. But, as the dissenting judge pointed out,can. But, as the dissenting judge pointed out,

– ““the defendant company was in a much better position to demonstrate the defendant company was in a much better position to demonstrate the authenticity of the can's label than the plaintiff.the authenticity of the can's label than the plaintiff.

PROVISIONAL RELEVENCEPROVISIONAL RELEVENCE Sometimes it is not immediately obvious that an item of evidence Sometimes it is not immediately obvious that an item of evidence

is relevant. In order to demonstrate relevance it may be necessary is relevant. In order to demonstrate relevance it may be necessary to adduce other evidence to link the item with the issues in the to adduce other evidence to link the item with the issues in the proceeding. proceeding.

This will often be true in the case of documentary evidence. For This will often be true in the case of documentary evidence. For example, the contents of a document may have a bearing on the example, the contents of a document may have a bearing on the issues in the case, but only if a particular person wrote it, and it issues in the case, but only if a particular person wrote it, and it may not be possible from the document to tell who wrote it. may not be possible from the document to tell who wrote it.

In that event, the relevance of the document depends on the In that event, the relevance of the document depends on the ability to identify the writer. ability to identify the writer.

It may be impossible to identify the writer at the same time as the It may be impossible to identify the writer at the same time as the document is introduced. document is introduced.

The judge must therefore have the power to admit the document The judge must therefore have the power to admit the document subject to later evidence demonstrating its relevancesubject to later evidence demonstrating its relevance

PRESUMPTIONSPRESUMPTIONS Our law makes considerable use of presumptions. Many Our law makes considerable use of presumptions. Many

presumptions are best considered in relation to that part of presumptions are best considered in relation to that part of the substantive law in which they operatethe substantive law in which they operate

In general terms, presumptions operate by allowing the In general terms, presumptions operate by allowing the court to infer or assume the truth of a fact (the "presumed" court to infer or assume the truth of a fact (the "presumed" fact) fact)

After a party has sufficiently demonstrated the existence After a party has sufficiently demonstrated the existence of other facts (the "basic" facts). of other facts (the "basic" facts).

In many cases presumptions shift an onus by requiring an In many cases presumptions shift an onus by requiring an opponent to adduce evidence or prove the contrary. opponent to adduce evidence or prove the contrary.

The use of presumptions is, therefore, intimately The use of presumptions is, therefore, intimately connected with burdens and standards of proofconnected with burdens and standards of proof

TYPES OF PRESUMPTIONSTYPES OF PRESUMPTIONSPRESUMPTIONS SHIFTING THE EVIDENTIAL BURDENPRESUMPTIONS SHIFTING THE EVIDENTIAL BURDEN. .

These presumptions require These presumptions require the court to assume the the court to assume the existence of the presumed fact, after it is satisfied of the existence of the presumed fact, after it is satisfied of the existence of the basic fact or facts, existence of the basic fact or facts,

so long as there is no evidence tending to negate the so long as there is no evidence tending to negate the existence of the presumed fact.existence of the presumed fact.

If the opponent of the presumption adduces evidence If the opponent of the presumption adduces evidence (including evidence by way of crossexamination) tending (including evidence by way of crossexamination) tending to negate the existence of the presumed fact then the to negate the existence of the presumed fact then the court must decide the question on the basis of all the court must decide the question on the basis of all the evidence in the case. evidence in the case.

The ultimate burden of proving the presumed fact is not disturbedThe ultimate burden of proving the presumed fact is not disturbed

TYPES OF PRESUMPTIONSTYPES OF PRESUMPTIONS

PRESUMPTIONS WHICH SHIFT A BURDEN PRESUMPTIONS WHICH SHIFT A BURDEN OF PROOFOF PROOF. .

These presumptions require the court to assume the These presumptions require the court to assume the existence of the presumed fact after it is satisfied of existence of the presumed fact after it is satisfied of the existence of the basic fact or facts. the existence of the basic fact or facts.

In order to defeat the presumption the opponent must In order to defeat the presumption the opponent must demonstrate by evidence (which may include demonstrate by evidence (which may include evidence by way of cross-examination) that the evidence by way of cross-examination) that the presumed fact does not exist on the balance of presumed fact does not exist on the balance of probabilitiesprobabilities

FACTORS FORMING “PRESUMPTION”FACTORS FORMING “PRESUMPTION” PROBABILITYPROBABILITY..

– Presumptions may be created to accord with an Presumptions may be created to accord with an assessment of the most likely factual situationassessment of the most likely factual situation

CONVENIENCECONVENIENCE. . – Presumptions may be created in order to avoid a Presumptions may be created in order to avoid a

party having to prove a fact when the evidence may party having to prove a fact when the evidence may be difficult or time consuming to find or likely to be be difficult or time consuming to find or likely to be unavailable. Presumptions may also be created in unavailable. Presumptions may also be created in order to foreclose consideration of an issue, and order to foreclose consideration of an issue, and shorten the trial, unless a party can seriously shorten the trial, unless a party can seriously question the presumption by adducing evidencequestion the presumption by adducing evidence

FACTORS FORMING “PRESUMPTION”FACTORS FORMING “PRESUMPTION” FAIRNESSFAIRNESS. .

– Presumptions may be created to compel a party to Presumptions may be created to compel a party to prove or adduce evidence concerning an issue because prove or adduce evidence concerning an issue because it is fair that such a burden should be imposed. For it is fair that such a burden should be imposed. For instance, a presumption may be imposed against a instance, a presumption may be imposed against a party with superior access to information about an party with superior access to information about an issue.issue.

POLICYPOLICY. . – Presumptions may be created in order to favour an Presumptions may be created in order to favour an

outcome which for reasons of policy is to be preferredoutcome which for reasons of policy is to be preferred

PRESUMPTIONS IN QSOPRESUMPTIONS IN QSO In the law of evidence presumptions are used to In the law of evidence presumptions are used to

facilitate the admissibility of documentary evidence facilitate the admissibility of documentary evidence and the proof of facts.and the proof of facts.

The QSO and many overseas evidence statutes create The QSO and many overseas evidence statutes create presumptions in relation to authenticity, sometimes presumptions in relation to authenticity, sometimes referred to as self-authenticating presumptions. referred to as self-authenticating presumptions.

Such presumptions allow documents to be admitted Such presumptions allow documents to be admitted which on their face explain their own identity. which on their face explain their own identity.

This, however, will be the general rule, so some This, however, will be the general rule, so some existing presumptions will be unnecessary under the existing presumptions will be unnecessary under the codecode

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCEDOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Documentary Evidence and its importance in Documentary Evidence and its importance in civil cases: civil cases: – Documents, basis of claim or defence Documents, basis of claim or defence – Documents upon which a party relies in support of Documents upon which a party relies in support of

his claim or defence his claim or defence – Relevant provisions in the CPC regarding their Relevant provisions in the CPC regarding their

reception or rejection (XIII)reception or rejection (XIII)

EXCLUSIONARY RULEEXCLUSIONARY RULE Order XIII R. 2 creates the Exclusionary Rule in civil cases.Order XIII R. 2 creates the Exclusionary Rule in civil cases. The rule of exclusion in the O.13, R.2 only comes into operation The rule of exclusion in the O.13, R.2 only comes into operation

when the documents on which the parties rely have been but were when the documents on which the parties rely have been but were not, produced at the first hearing…not, produced at the first hearing…

where according to the evidence, at the date of the first hearing where according to the evidence, at the date of the first hearing certain documents were not in the possession of the parties and did certain documents were not in the possession of the parties and did not know their existence not know their existence

HELDHELD Discretion in case of official record of undoubted authority Discretion in case of official record of undoubted authority

to admit documents ; to admit documents ; Discretion to be exercised when it is necessary for just Discretion to be exercised when it is necessary for just

decision of case.decision of case.

PUBLIC DOCUMENTPUBLIC DOCUMENT There have been statutory provisions dating well back into the There have been statutory provisions dating well back into the

nineteenth century to facilitate the proof of public documents nineteenth century to facilitate the proof of public documents (documents held or produced by public bodies) and official seals (documents held or produced by public bodies) and official seals and signatures. and signatures.

These provisions, contained in the QSO i,e. Art.85 read with 150 These provisions, contained in the QSO i,e. Art.85 read with 150 of the constitution, have been enacted in a more or less piecemeal of the constitution, have been enacted in a more or less piecemeal fashion over the years. They are at present complicated and fashion over the years. They are at present complicated and difficult to relate to one anotherdifficult to relate to one another– – – "In public documents made for the information of the Crown, or all the "In public documents made for the information of the Crown, or all the

King's subjects who may require the information they contain, the entry by a King's subjects who may require the information they contain, the entry by a public officer is presumed to be true when it is made, and is for that reason public officer is presumed to be true when it is made, and is for that reason receivable in all cases, whether the officer or his successor may be receivable in all cases, whether the officer or his successor may be concerned in such cases or not."‘concerned in such cases or not."‘

Lord Lord HudsonHudson

PUBLIC DOCUMENTPUBLIC DOCUMENT

Meaning of public documents – Art 85; and Art Meaning of public documents – Art 85; and Art 150 of the Constitution 150 of the Constitution

Meaning of private documents – Art 85 Meaning of private documents – Art 85 Registration of documents under the Registration of documents under the

Registration Act 1908Registration Act 1908 Record maintained under the Land Revenue Act Record maintained under the Land Revenue Act

   Presumption as to the genuineness of public Presumption as to the genuineness of public

documents (90-101) documents (90-101)

MODE OF PROOFMODE OF PROOF

Both public and private documentary evidence Both public and private documentary evidence is governed by their manner of productionis governed by their manner of production

Primary evidence (73)Primary evidence (73) Secondary Evidence (74)Secondary Evidence (74) Content of documents (72-77)Content of documents (72-77)

READING MATERIALREADING MATERIAL

Gopal Das – AIR 1943 PC 83, 87  Gopal Das – AIR 1943 PC 83, 87   Abdullah v Abdul Karim – PLD 1968 SC 140 Abdullah v Abdul Karim – PLD 1968 SC 140 Muhammad Ashraf – PLD 1973 SC 160, 178Muhammad Ashraf – PLD 1973 SC 160, 178 Kumar – AIR 1929 PC 99 Kumar – AIR 1929 PC 99 Kanda – PLD 1949 PC 270 Kanda – PLD 1949 PC 270 Allah Ditta – PLD 1961 Lah. 643 Allah Ditta – PLD 1961 Lah. 643 Allah Varyo – 1990 CLC 1899Allah Varyo – 1990 CLC 1899