| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1973 SLG 195 1973 SLD 195 1973 SCMR 589 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-66 of 1973, decision dated: 31st August 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan at Karachi, dated the 2nd of March 1973, in Revision Application No. 229 of 1967)
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, ACTG. C.J. AND SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J
Petitioner in person. Nemo for
Respondent
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-66 of 1973, decision dated: 31st August 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan at Karachi, dated the 2nd of March 1973, in Revision Application No. 229 of 1967)
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, ACTG. C.J. AND SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J
Petitioner in person. Nemo for
Respondent
IBRAHIM
VS
Mst. KULSOOM BEGUM
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss. 115, 96(2), O. IX, r. 13 & O. XLIII, r. 1(d)-Ex parte decree-Aggrieved party has two alternatives : to make application under O. IX, r. !3 for setting aside ex parte decree or if he is unsuccessful to prefer an appeal under O. XLIII, r. 1(d) or under S. 96(2)-Revision under S. 115 not competent. ORDER SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J.-The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan dismissing the former's revision petition under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Judge held that the revision petition was not maintainable as the petitioner had neither preferred an appeal available to him under section 96(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure nor made an application under Order IX, rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In this revision petition before the High Court, the petitioner felt aggrieved by the order dated the Ist of August 1967, of the Civil Judge 1st Class, whereby the application for setting aside the ex parse order had been dismissed. His revisional application from the order dated the 1st of August 1967, was dismissed on the 3rd of October 1967. The revisional proceedings arose out of the respondent's suit against the petitioner for recovery of Rs. 15,000 due from the latter as arrears of rents of a house. Since the 24th of May 1967, for one reason or another the petitioner succeeded in deferring the trial of the suit till the 13th of October 1967, when an ex parte decree was passed against him. The petitioner filed the revision in the High Court sometime in November 1967, i.e., after the ex parte decree had already been passed. In these circumstances the High Court was right in holding that the revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not maintainable. Section 96(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that an appeal may lie from an original decree passed ex parte and section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure empowers the High Court to call for the record of any case which bas been decided by any Court subordinate to such High Court and in which no appeal lies thereto, and if such subordinate Court…
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