Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 117,120,77, 72

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 12

1. Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)---

----Arts. 117 & 120---Fact, proof of---Onus to prove---Maxim "onus probandi actori incumbit"----Applicability---He who asserts a fact must prove the same, which is based on Latin maxim "onus probandi actori incumbit"---Mode of proof is the procedure by which "facts in issue" and also "the relevant facts" have to be proved during trial.

1. Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)---

----Art. 77---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 12---Secondary evidence, leading of---Principle---Prior notice---Requirement---In suit for specific performance of agreement to sell, petitioner/defendant was aggrieved of permission granted to respondents/plaintiffs to lead secondary evidence with regard to legal notice in question without filing application in such regard---Validity---Party may furnish secondary evidence and filing of application seeking permission to lead secondary evidence is not mandatory in every case---Application for leading secondary evidence by a party is not precluded---As filing of a formal application for leading secondary evidence is not mandatory, the stage at which such application is filed becomes irrelevant---Respondents/plaintiffs filed application for the reason that legal notice issued by their counsel, duly referred (by name) in plaint of their suit and copies of postal receipts were appended with plaint and petitioner/ defendant had denied the same, therefore, respondents/plaintiff sought to lead secondary evidence of legal notice---Lower Appellate Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction correctly upheld the decision of Trial Court, with independent and cogent reasons---Respondents/plaintiffs made out a prima facie case to lead secondary evidence and prior notice in terms of Art. 77 (1) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 was not required, as document intended to be produced itself was a notice--High Court declined to interfere in orders passed by two Courts below--Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances.