Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. XVII, R. 3---Closure of defendant's evidence for failing to produce evidence---Court allowing defendant to record his statement after closure of his evidence---Scope---Plaintiff adduced and completed his evidence, while the evidence of defendants was closed in terms of O. XVII, R.3, C.P.C. as they availed considerable opportunities but failed to adduce evidence---High Court in its revisional jurisdiction allowed defendants to adduce evidence but only to the extent of recording their own statements---Validity---High Court gave defendants an opportunity of appearance/examination as their own witness (or through attorney), after seemingly considering the fact that as the defendants were not marked absent in the order sheet of the Trial Court on the date when O. XVII, R.3, C.P.C. was applied, therefore some margin should be given to them and it should be assumed that they were present---Such approach adopted by the High Court could possibly be a valid approach in the facts of the present case---Probability of the defendants' presence and they offering themselves to be examined as witnesses could not be ruled out from the material available on the record, and the view thus formed by the High Court could not be held to be absolutely illegal and unfounded---Petition was dismissed accordingly. Muhammad Aslam v. Nazir Ahmed 2008 SCMR 942 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XVII, R. 3---Court may proceed notwithstanding either party fails to produce evidence---Scope---Provisions of O.XVII, R. 3, C.P.C. were penal in nature and should be strictly construed and applied---Once the case of a delinquent litigant squarely fell within the purview and mischief of O.XVII, R. 3, C.P.C. then neither any concession should be shown to such litigant nor a lenient view favouring him should be resorted to; this should not even be permissibly done on the touchstone of exercise of discretionary power of the court and/or on the approach that technicalities of procedure should not be allowed to impede the interest of justice, and/or that the litigants should not be knocked out on technical grounds, and that adversarial lis should…

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