| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 3573 2016 SLD 3573 2016 CLC 1660 |
Lahore High Court
MUHAMMAD KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, JUSTICE
Sh. Naveed Shahryar and Bashir Ahmad Mirza for Petitioner. Ch. Aish Muhammad Khan Sara for
Respondent No. 4. Dr. Muhammad Irtiza Awan for
Respondent No. 3. Malik Abdul Aziz Awan, Asstt. A.G., Punjab for
Respondent.
MUHAMMAD KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, JUSTICE
Sh. Naveed Shahryar and Bashir Ahmad Mirza for Petitioner. Ch. Aish Muhammad Khan Sara for
Respondent No. 4. Dr. Muhammad Irtiza Awan for
Respondent No. 3. Malik Abdul Aziz Awan, Asstt. A.G., Punjab for
Respondent.
MUHAMMAD ANWAR AND 27 othersS
VS
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB THROUGH DISTRICT OFFICER (REVENUE), PAKPATTAN AND 3 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- ---O. VII, R.11 & S.151---"Rejection of plaint" and "dismissal of suit"---Distinction---Trial Court without recording of evidence, on application filed by defendant, dismissed suit filed by plaintiff, on the ground that it was not Maintainable-- Validity--- Difference existed between dismissal of suit and rejection of plaint---In O. VII, R.11, C.P.C. words "the rejection of plaint" meant that if ingredients in O. VII, R.11, C.P.C. were available in plaint, the Court had jurisdiction and powers to reject the plaint---Dismissal of suit connoted that it was a final determination of controversy between parties meaning thereby the Trial Court could dismiss the suit only after holding inquiry and recording of evidence---Rejection of plaint provided or opened door for plaintiff for filing fresh suit but in case of dismissal of suit no fresh suit could be filed and only statutory remedy was available against dismissal order---Defendants filed application under S.151 C.P.C. by placing on record all facts finally settled between parties and plaintiffs admitted all such facts, hence, no question for further determination of any issue had arisen and Trial Court was within its rights to reject the plaint under O. VII, R.11, .C.P.C.---Dismissal of suit for invoking doctrine of res judicata was not correct interpretation of law by two Courts below-11th Courts below should have treated application under S.151, C. P. C. an application under O. VII, R.11, C.P.C. and rejected the plaint---High Court modified orders passed by two Courts below which would be deemed to be passed under 0. VII, R.11, C.P.C. and plaint was deemed to be rejected---Revision was allowed in, circumstances. Punjab Board of Revenue, Employes Cooperative Housing Society Limited v. Additional District Judge, Lahore and others 2003 SCMR 1284; Q.B.E. Insurance (International) Ltd. v. Jaffar Flour and Oil Mills Ltd. and others 2,008 SCMR 1037; Saleem Malik v. Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) and 2 others PLD 2008 SC 650; Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Defence and another v. Jaffar Khan and others PLD 2010 SC 604; Arshad Ali and 6 others v. Muhammad…
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