Case Details

Citation(s)
1972 SLG 144 1972 SLD 144 1972 SCMR 179
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 216 of 1971, decision dated: 14th March 1972
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD AND SALAHUDDIN AHMED, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

SHAH NAWAZ AND 6 others

VS

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF AND 3 others--Respondents

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 149 & O. VII, r. 11--­Deficiency in court fee-Court could, in its discretion, allow time to plaintiff to make up deficiency unless plaintiff guilty of contumacy or positive mala fides-Pre-emption suit unaccompanied by proper court-fee-Subsequent application for amendment of plaint and for paying deficiency in court fee, held, rightly allowed by Court in circumstances of case. A person filed a suit for pre-emption but had failed to pay proper court-fee. Subsequently an application was made for the amendment of the plaint and for paying the deficiency in court-fees. The application was allowed by the Court but the opposite-party challenged this order of the Court before the Supreme Court and urged that in a suit for pre-emption, the plaintiff should not be allowed time to make up deficiency in the court-fees where after the filing of written statement, the plaintiff had slept for a year in making up the deficiency. Held : Unless the plaintiff is guilty of contumacy or positive mala fides in putting in deficient court-fees along with his plaint, the Court could in its discretion allow time to the plaintiff to put in the deficient court-fee. In the facts and circumstances of the case it could not be said that the plaintiffs had been plainly very negligent, and had moreover, completely failed to provide any excuse for their default. They had offered to pay the deficit court-fee and the Civil Judge had permitted them to do so. Furthermore, under Order VII, rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure the plaint can only be rejected in a case where the relief claimed is under-valued and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so. Saeed Ahmad and others v. Karam Singh P L D 1949 Lab. 380 and Jagat Ram v. Misar Kharaiti Ram and another A I R 1938 Lab. 361 considered. Muhammad Naivaz Khan v. Makhdoom Syed Ghulam Mujtaba Shah P L D 1970 S C 37 ref. Jamil Hussain Rizvi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Ali Imam Naqvi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing : 14th March 19 72. ORDER SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J.-This…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492