Islamic Movies Day of Judgment -Islamic Movie Dubbed in (Urdu/Hindi) Online Download. Hazrat Immam Hussain (R.A) -Dubbed in Urdu/Hindi Islamic Movie Online Free. Watch Online: Hazrat Immam Hussain Urdu Dubbed Movie Watch Online. Hazrat Essa/Issa (A.S) Watch Online Full Movie/Film In Urdu/Hindi Free Download. Hazrat Essa a.s Movie In Urdu. The.Message.in.Urdu.700MB Movies Preview. Publication date 1976. Perhaps the single greatest motion picture ever made dealing with Islam. The Message (Al-Risala) is now available in a new digitally mastered version, presented in widescreen with optimized picture and sound in Urdu. Tags: Islamic Historical Movies In Urdu Full Video Songs, Video, Islamic Historical Movies In Urdu Full bollywood movie video, 3gp Islamic Historical Movies In Urdu Full video Download, mp4 Islamic Historical Movies In Urdu Full hindi movie songs download, Islamic Historical Movies In Urdu Full (2015) all video download, Islamic Historical Movies In Urdu Full Hd Video Songs, Islamic Historical. Islamic movies collection by Payam Islamic cultural center, All the Irani and Islamic Movie may be watched and download for free from here. Now Learn to educate. Free Download Movie Reviews: I was assigned to view this movie for class. From what I have learned thus far, this movie is the best representation of the truth about Islam. With all that is going on in the world today and many people's misconceptions about Islam this is a must see for all. Download full movies for free. Pacifico Arceo vs. 142641 (July 17, 2006)FACTS: On March 14, 1991, petitioner, obtained a loan from private complainant Josefino Cenizal in the amount ofP100,000.00. Several weeks thereafter, [petitioner] obtained an additional loan of P50,000.00 from Cenizal. Petitioner then issued in favor of Cenizal, Bank of the Philippine Islands [(BPI)] Check No. 163255, post dated August 4, 1991, for P150,000.00, at Cenizals house located at 70 Panay Avenue, Quezon City. Pacifico Arceo vs. Pac west arms history. 142641 (July 17, 2006) FACTS: On March 14, 1991, petitioner, obtained a loan from private complainant Josefino Cenizal in the amount ofP100,000.00. One of the few literary pieces that were written by a fellow Filipino, I must say that Liwayway Arceo is a very talented writer. The novel is about the struggles of a teacher, who, after fighting for what she loves, finally redeemed her name. When August 4, 1991 came, Cenizal did not deposit the check immediately because [petitioner] promised [] that he would replace the check with cash. Such promise was made verbally seven (7) times. When his patience ran out, Cenizal brought the check to the bank for encashment. The head office of the Bank of the Philippine Islands through a letter dated December 5, 1991, informed Cenizal that the check bounced because of insufficient funds. Thereafter, Cenizal went to the house of petitioner to inform him of the dishonor of the check but Cenizal found out that [petitioner] had left the place. So, Cenizal referred the matter to a lawyer who wrote a letter giving [petitioner] three days from receipt thereof to pay the amount of the check. [Petitioner] still failed to make good the amount of the check. ![]() As a consequence, Cenizal executed on January 20, 1992 before the office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City his affidavit and submitted documents in support of his complaint for estafa and violation of BP 22 against petitioner. After due investigation, this case for violation of BP 22 was filed against [petitioner] on March 27, 1992. The check in question and the return slip were however lost by Cenizal as a result of a fire that occurred near his residence on September 16, 1992. Cenizal executed an Affidavit of Loss regarding the loss of the check in question and the return slip. After trial, petitioner was found guilty as charged. Aggrieved, he appealed to the Court of Appeals. However, on April 28, 1999, the appellate court affirmed the trial courts decision in toto. Petitioner sought reconsideration but it was denied. Hence, this petition, Petitioner claims that the trial and appellate courts erred in convicting him despite the failure of the prosecution to present the dishonored check during the trial. He also contends that he should not be held liable for the dishonor of the check because it was presented beyond the 90day period provided under the law. Petitioner further questions his conviction since the notice requirement was not complied with and he was given only three days to pay, not five banking days as required by law. Finally, petitioner asserts that he had already paid his obligation to Cenizal. ISSUE: Whether or not the accused is guilty of B.P. 22 HELD: Cenizals presentment of the check to the drawee bank 120 days (four months) after its issue was still within the allowable period. Petitioner was freed neither from the obligation to keep sufficient funds in his account nor from liability resulting from the dishonor of the check.Petitioners insistence on the presentation of the check in evidence as a condition sine qua non for conviction under BP 22 is wrong. Petitioner anchors his argument on Rule 130, Section 3, of the Rules of Court, otherwise known as the best evidence rule. However, the rule applies only where the content of the document is the subject of the inquiry.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |