| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 1845 2014 SLD 1845 2014 CLC 1674 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No.53-D of 2013, decision dated: 27-12-2013.
ABDUL LATIF KHAN, JUSTICE
Saleem Nawaz Awan for Petitioner. S. Mastan Ali Zaidi for
Respondent.
Civil Revision No.53-D of 2013, decision dated: 27-12-2013.
ABDUL LATIF KHAN, JUSTICE
Saleem Nawaz Awan for Petitioner. S. Mastan Ali Zaidi for
Respondent.
GUL ZAMAN
VS
SHAH NAWAZ AND another
Law: Code of Civil Procedure of 1882
Section: O.IX,R.13
Law: Code of Civil Procedure of 1882
Section: O.IX,R.13
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: 164,181
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)-------S. 5---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. IX, R. 13---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Arts.164 & 181--- Pre-emption suit---Ex parte decree, setting aside of---Limitation---Condonation of delay---Scope---Petitioner-defendant despite service did not turn up and Trial Court was left with no option but to place him ex parte---Evidence was produced by the plaintiff and suit was ex parte decreed---Defendant moved application for setting aside ex parte decree without giving reasons for delay and without showing his source of information about the proceedings---Application of defendant, however, was accepted on payment of Rs.2500---Defendant joined the proceedings and contested the suit by filing written statement but again absented himself from the court and ex-parte decree was passed against him---Defendant again moved another application which was dismissed by the courts below due to his conduct and mischief of limitation---Said application for setting aside ex parte decree was covered under Art.164 and not Art.181 of Limitation Act, 1908 and was barred by time---No plausible reasons or sufficient cause having been shown in the application which was not supported by even tentative piece of evidence---Delay of each and every day had to be explained in accordance with law---No reason for condonation of delay was assigned in the said application which was barred by 53/54 days---Conduct of defendant had disentitled him to lenient view of the court as he did not turn up again on the first occasion despite service and absented himself from the court---Defendant had been rightly dealt with by the courts below in accordance with law---Revision was dismissed in circumstances. JUDGMENT ABDUL LATIF KHAN, J.--- Aggrieved of the order dated 7-3-2013 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-III, D.I.Khan vide which his appeal against the order dated 11-1-2013 of learned Civil Judge-IV, D.I.Khan, dismissing his application for setting aside the ex parte decree 3-5-2012, was dismissed, the petitioner has filed the instant revision petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Courts below have…
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