Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Said jurisdiction had very limited scope, and could be exercised only in the cases where subordinate court had exceeded its jurisdiction; or had declined to exercise its jurisdiction; or had acted in exercise of its jurisdiction in a manner contrary to law; or in manner not warranted by law. 2001 SCMR 789 and PLD 1994 SC 291 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Concurrent findings of fact---Interference---Scope---Jurisdiction of High Court to interfere with concurrent findings of fact in revisional jurisdiction, was narrower---High Court could only interfere with the order of subordinate court on ground that court below had assumed jurisdiction, which did not vest in it; or it had failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it by law; or the court below had acted with material irregularity affecting its jurisdiction in the case---High Court under revisional jurisdiction, could only correct jurisdictional errors of courts below---Fact that High Court, while reappraising evidence on record, reached a conclusion different from that arrived at by two courts below, could never be a ground justifying interference with a finding of fact, muchless a concurrent one on basis of evidence produced before them. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revision---Maintainability---Trial Court, in the present case, had very elaborately and comprehensively discussed each and every point and had assigned cogent and sound reasons for its findings---No misreading or non-reading of the evidence adduced by the parties, either by the Trial Court or by the Appellate Court were noticed---Two courts below had not ignored any material piece of evidence on record; or that their findings were not perversed, or were suffering from any jurisdictional error---Revision application being not maintainable, was dismissed, in circumstances. (d) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----Ss. 115 & 100---Revision---Scope and mandatory requirements---Revision would lie to High Court against the decision or order of subordinate…

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