| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 3002 2011 SLD 3002 2011 PLD 1 |
High Court (AJ&K)
Civil Revision Nos. 45 of 2010, decided on 3rd June, 2010.
GHULAM MUSTAFA MUGHAL, C, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Revision Nos. 45 of 2010, decided on 3rd June, 2010.
GHULAM MUSTAFA MUGHAL, C, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Sahibzada RAJA MUHAMMAD HANIF KHAN and another
VS
SHARAF DIN and another
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VI, Rr. 1, 4, O. VII, Rr.1, 6, 11 & O. VIII, R.1---Special Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss. 42, 54 & 39---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.3---Suit for declaration, perpetual injunction and cancellation of gift-deed---Plea of fraud, deception, misrepresentation, breach of trust etc.---Rejection of plaint, application for---Object, Scope and application of Os. VI, VII & VIII, C.P.C. ---Plaintiff had alleged that gift-deed in respect of his property got executed by defendant by practising fraud and deception---Defendants filed their written statement along with a separate application for rejection of suit under O. VII, R.11, C.P.C.---Trial Court rejected application filed by the defendants---Validity---Plaintiff in his plaint had not mentioned particulars of alleged fraud and deception, which was mandatory under O. VI, R.4, C. P. C. and its non-compliance would entail dismissal of the plaint---Rules of pleadings as laid down in Os. VI, VII, VIII, C.P.C. were not mere formalities, but had purpose behind them---Object of law of pleadings was that the whole case of the parties should be placed before the court with clarity, so that each of them could be confined to a definite stand---Order VI, R.4, C.P.C. enjoined upon a party that all cases in which fraud misrepresentation, breach of trust, wilful default or undue influence was alleged, the pleadings should contain full particulars by giving details thereof---Forgery, fraud and misrepresentation, could not be taken into consideration, unless particulars were set out---Law would protect dignity of everyone by not allowing to plead fraud and forgery against any person in a casual manner---Rules of common sense and fairplay also demanded that charge of fraud should not be allowed to be levelled, unless precise information was supplied to the person against whom it was levelled; so that he could not be taken by surprise---Plaintiff had not bothered to claim exception as contemplated by O. VII, R. 6, C.P.C., which again made it obligatory for the plaintiff to plead exemption in order to satisfy the court as to why the suit had been filed after the period of…
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