Mr. A sues Mr. B for trespassing on his land, Mr. B alleges the existence of a public right of way on the land, which Mr. A denies. The existence of decree in favor of the defendant, in a suit by Mr. A against Mr. C for a trespass on the same land in which C alleged the existence of the same right way ______?
مسٹر اے نے مسٹر بی کو اپنی سرزمین پر گستاخی کرنے پر مقدمہ کیا ، مسٹر بی نے اس زمین پر عوامی حق کے وجود کا الزام لگایا ، جس سے مسٹر اے انکار کرتا ہے۔ مدعا علیہ کے حق میں فرمان کا وجود ، مسٹر اے کے خلاف مسٹر سی کے خلاف اسی سرزمین پر بدکاری کے لئے ایک مقدمہ میں جس میں سی نے اسی صحیح طریقے سے وجود کا الزام لگایا ہے؟
- Is relevant but it is not conclusive proof
- Is relevant and it is conclusive proof for the right of way exists
- Is not a relevant proof
- None of these
Explanation
Under the Qanoon-e-Shahadat, judgments in former cases may be relevant but they do not operate as conclusive proof against parties who were not part of that earlier case.
Since Mr. B was not a party in the earlier suit (between A and C), the decree is relevant but cannot conclusively establish the right of way against him.
Related MCQs
- Article 41
- Article 40
- Article 39
- Article 38
اس سوال کو وضاحت کے ساتھ پڑھیں
- Best Evidence Rule
- Res Judicata Rule
- Hearsay Rule
- Estoppel Rule
اس سوال کو وضاحت کے ساتھ پڑھیں
- Where fraud is involved
- In all cases without exception
- Against a minor in appropriate circumstances
- Where law expressly prevents its operation
اس سوال کو وضاحت کے ساتھ پڑھیں
- Judicial record
- Official register
- Power of attorney
- Record of a public officer
اس سوال کو وضاحت کے ساتھ پڑھیں
- Convicted
- Acquitted
- Remanded
- Discharged automatically in every case
اس سوال کو وضاحت کے ساتھ پڑھیں
