Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 3586 2016 SLD 3586 2016 CLC 1796
Lahore High Court

CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD, JAHANGIR, JUSTICE
Ch. Masood Ahmad Zafar for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents.

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF AND anotherS

VS

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND 5 others-

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- --------O. XVII, R. 3---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.12---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199--- Constitutional petition--- Scope--- Suit for possession through specific performance---Striking off right of cross-examination of defendant's witnesses---Scope---Plaintiff filed suit for possession through specific performance wherein right of cross-examination of plaintiff was struck off by Trial Court---Plaintiff sought numerous adjournments for cross-examination but he failed to cross-examine the witnesses of defendant despite being given ample opportunities to cross-examine witnesses---When defendant had succeeded in recording statements of witnesses, plaintiff slipped out of court room without cross examining witnesses---Trial court closed right of cross-examination by plaintiff and revisional court also dismissed petition assailing said order---Validity---No illegality, perversity or jurisdictional defect having been found in the order passed by courts below, High Court dismissed constitutional petition. (b) Administration of justice--- --------Prime duty of courts is to ensure that case is decided on merit as early as possible and it cannot be left at the choice of parties to linger on matter for illegal gain in aid of injunctive order usually issued by court during pendency of suit. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD JAHANGIR, JUSTICE:------------------ By filing the instant Constitutional Petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 28.05.2009 passed by learned trial court whereby right of cross examination of petitioners on DW1 to DW5 was closed and judgment dated 05.10.2009 delivered by learned Additional District Judge by virtue of which Civil Revision filed by the petitioners was also dismissed. Being aggrieved, instant writ petition has been filed. 2. Arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners heard. On the other none has turned up on behalf of respondent No.3, who was served personally as well as respondent No.6, who was duly represented by an advocate, and as such they are proceeded ex-parte. Record perused. 3. The facts germane for the disposal of instant petition are that…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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