IN THE COURT OF ABDUL JABBAR, ADJ RAWALPINDI

Muhammad Tariq
Versus
Muhammad Nasir

APPLICATION FOR APPROPRIATE ORDER UNDER ORDER XLI RULE

33 AND ALL OTHER ENABLING PROVISIONS OF LAW ON BEHALF
OF APPELLANT

WRITTEN REPLY ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

Preliminary Objections.

1. That instant petition is neither maintainable nor proceedable.

2. That petitioner/appellant is estopped from his own words,
conduct and deeds to file instant petition.
3. That instant petition is result of afterthought and has only been
filed to linger on the matter.
4. That all the documents were duly exhibited and proved by the
answering respondent in his evidence and Honourable Trial
Court while relying on such documents has passed Judgment
and Decree under appeal. Petitioner/appellant remain miserably
failed to prove his case and through instant petition, appellant
wants to de-track the proceedings.

ON MERITS
1. Para No. 1 is correct.
2. Para No. 2 is correct to the extent of placement of Ex.P-6 and
Ex.P-8. Rest of the para is denied. Ex.P-6 and Ex.P-8 are
genuine and have been proved by answering respondent.
Appellant has cross examined the witnesses of respondent at
length, however he remain miserably failed to bring the
authenticity of said documents under clouds and now by filing
instant petition appellants wants to fill up the lacunas left in his
case.
3. Para No. 3 is denied in view of detailed submissions made above.
4. Para No. 4 is denied in view of detailed submissions made above.
5. Para No. 5 is dined.

It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that instant petition be

dismissed with costs.

Answering respondent

Through

MUHAMMAD ILYAS SHEIKH

ADVOCATE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

AYESHA HAMEED RANA

Advocate High Court

SARDAR NABEEL RAZA

Advocate High Court

MUHAMMAD TAIMUR MALIK

Advocate High Court

TALHA ILYAS
Advocate