| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 1037 2014 SLD 1037 2014 CLD 111 |
Balochistan High Court
Regular First Appeal No. 138 of 2010, decided on 25th July, 2013.
MUHAMMAD NOOR MESKANZAI AND MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, JJ
Muhammad Ilyas Mughal for Appellant. Ajmal Khan Kakar for
Respondent.
Regular First Appeal No. 138 of 2010, decided on 25th July, 2013.
MUHAMMAD NOOR MESKANZAI AND MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, JJ
Muhammad Ilyas Mughal for Appellant. Ajmal Khan Kakar for
Respondent.
MUHAMMAD RASOOL
VS
ABDUL GHAFOOR
Law:
Section:
(a) Malicious prosecution--- ----Suit for damages---Plaintiff filed suit for damages on the ground that he was acquitted of the charge in F.I.R. lodged by the defendant in relation to snatching of a sale agreement---Suit was partially decreed by the Trial Court---Validity---Trial Court had based its findings on certain documents but said documents were neither tendered in evidence nor exhibited---Documents neither tendered in evidence nor produced and exhibited could not be relied---Such documents could not be made basis for decision of a lis rather were treated as non-existent---Defendant was not afforded opportunity of cross-examination on said documents---Trial Court could neither consider such documents as a valid piece of evidence nor same could be used against the defendant---Documents were illegally taken into consideration and were believed though were not referable---Plaintiff had failed to prove the case by producing cogent and confidence inspiring evidence and also failed to justify the compensation demanded on various counts---Defendant was right to lodge the report as there was a probable cause for lodging the same---Prima facie, there was no malice on the part of defendant---Trial Court did not take into consideration the basic elements on the basis of which suit for malicious prosecution could be accepted or rejected---No doubt plaintiff had proved that there was a case against him and he was arrested but rest of elements could not be proved by him---Plaintiff was required to prove want of reasonable and probable cause for prosecution and defendant acted maliciously---Plaintiff had failed to prove elements entailing him for the decree prayed for---Defendant had succeeded to prove that he acted with reasonable and probable cause---Trial Court mis-appreciated the facts, mis-applied the law and mis-read the evidence---Findings drawn by the Trial Court being perverse and un-sustainable could not be maintained---Appeal was accepted and and decree passed by the Trial Court were set aside and suit was dismissed. (b) Malicious prosecution--- ----Elements to be taken into consideration---Elements on the basis of which suit for…
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