Azaad law group & Academy

Hurry up! limited seats for preparation of upcoming civil judge exams...... Contact 0334-5482754

This photo has a pecularity...
Those whose right side of brain is working, they will see the color of the dress as blue nd black..
If left side is working they will see white nd golden color....
If show this pic to another person, u can find out difference..
The theory is that people are either left-brained or right-brained, meaning that one side of their brain is dominant. If you’re mostly analytical and methodical in your thinking, you’re said to be left-brained. If you tend to be more creative or artistic, you’re thought to be right-brained.

This theory is based on the fact that the brain’s two hemispheres function differently. This first came to light in the 1960s, thanks to the research of psychobiologist and Nobel Prize winner Roger W. Sperry.

Few Grounds for dismissal of a suit for specific performance
1. Handwriting expert reported that signature are forged. (2012 CLC 1699)
2. Two attested witnesses were not produced. (2006 CLC 571)
3. Agreement was written by unlicensed person. (2006 CLC 571)
4. Stamp paper was not issued by stamp vendor . (2012 MLD 535)
5. Dates of purchasing stamp paper and endorsement were different. (2011 YLR 404)
6. Purchaser of stamp paper was not produced as witness. (2011 MLD 404)
7. Stamp paper was issued on one date in favour of an unknown person and was executed on another date. (PLD 2008 Queta 01)
8. Payment of whole consideration was paid before ex*****on. (2006 YLR 2446)
9. Scribe was not a registered Waseeqa Navees. (2006 CLC 1444)
10. Register of scribe belongs to another person wherein various pages and serial number were missing. (2006 CLC 1444)
11. Contradiction as to vanue where bargain took place. (2006 CLC 1444)
12. Contradiction as to person who obtained stamp paper. (2006 CLC 1444)
13. Plaintiff failed to produce bank record as to payment of half money. 2006 MLD 886
14. Date, Time, Month and Place of transaction was not given in pleading or evidence. (2005 YLR 2655)
15. Number of N.I.C was different from number on agreement. (2002 CLC 942)
16. Land was situated at a place whereas stamp paper was purchased from another place. (2002 CLC 942)
17. Neither vendor of stamp paper nor scribe was produced. (2001 YLR 2145)
18. Agreement was scribed on plain paper and was written by unlicensed petition-writer whereas both were available as nearby place. ( 1996 MLD 562)
19. Stamp paper was purchased at one date and executed after one week, stamp paper neither showed name of stamp vendor nor the place from where it was purchased. (1992 CLC 2193)
20. Failure to deposit balance amount. (PLD 2002 Lah 88, 2012 CLC 1392)
21. Two marginal witnesses were not produced. (2013 YLR 903, 2009 SCMR 740)
22. Payment of consideration not proved.(2006 YLR 1039 )
23. Document was not put before witness. (2006 MLD 1622)
24. One witness was not produced without any reason/ explanation. (2006 MLD 1622)
25. Scribe admitted that alleged promisor was not present at the time of ex*****on neither he signed before him. (2006 MLD 1622)
26. Claim of plaintiff valuing 25 lac was based on a document which was not registered. (2011 CLC 309)
27. Agreement was signed twice. (2011 CLC 309)
28. Original agreement to sell not produced…loss of agreement not pleaded….no attempt was made to produce secondary evidence…plaintiff was not confronted with…Executant defendant was not identified by anyone. (2005 YLR 463)
29. National Identity Card number was not written. (2005 YLR 3163)
30. Lost of original document not proved. (1995 SCMR 1237)
31. It is doubtful that plaintiff paid whole consideration but did not insist for registered sale deed in his favour. (2006 YLR 2779)

Monday test for Llb 3 ; CPC order 7 rule 10 and 11;

Exams Llb 1 and 2 commence from 16 and 17 July respectively, date sheet available on Punjab university website ;

The State Vs. Dosso & Others (PLD 1958 SC (PAK.) 533) On the 7th October 1958, President Iskander Mirza annulled the constitution of 1956, dismissed the Central and Provincial Legislatures, imposed Martial Law and took over the entire administrative and legislative machinery. Immediately thereafter Laws (Continuance in Force) Order 1958 was promulgated as a result of which laws, other than the Constitution of 1956, which were in force before the assumption of authority by Martial Law Administration, were validated and the jurisdiction of the Courts was restored. (PLD 1958 SC (PAK) 533) The Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Mohammad Munir, held that since Article 5 of the late Constitution (relating to Fundamental Rights) had disappeared from the new legal Order, the Frontier Crimes Regulation 1901 by reason of Act IV of Laws (Continuance in Force) Order 1958 was still in force and all proceedings in cases in which validity of that Regulation had been called in question having abated, the convictions recorded and references made to the Council of Elders were good. (Ibid. P. 542.) (PLD 1958 SC (PAK) 533) Where revolution is successful it satisfies the test of efficacy and becomes a basic law creating fact. On that assumption the Laws (Continuance in Force) Order, however transitory or imperfect, was a new legal order and it was in accordance with that order that the validity of the laws and the correctness of judicial decisions had to be determined. (Ibid. P. 540) (PLD 1958 SC (PAK) 533) The appeals were accordingly disposed of