MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.- This second apical is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.3.1976, passed by Civil Judge, Sheikhupura whereby suit filed by the respondent was decreed.
Appeal preferred by the present appellant was also dismissed by learned Addl. District Judge, vide judgment & decree dated 13.2.1978.
2. Point raised in this appeal is that the suit was deficiently stamped for the purpose of court fee and thus the suit was liable to be dismissed. However, it is admitted that no Court fee was determined by the Courts below. . According to the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court reported as PLD 1984 S.C. 289, it is incumbent upon the court to first determine the exact amount of Court fee and then to provide opportunity to make up the deficiency. As admittedly, no determination has been made consequently argument of learned counsel has no force. Consequently, this appeal has no merit and is hereby dismissed by upholding the judgments and decrees passed by the court below. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.