| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2889 2016 SLD 2889 2016 PLD 392 |
Sindh High Court
Civil Suit No. 1602 of 2012, decision Dated: 25-03-2015.
SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Ramzan Ghaus
Respondent(s) by: Khawaja Shamsul Islam
Civil Suit No. 1602 of 2012, decision Dated: 25-03-2015.
SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Ramzan Ghaus
Respondent(s) by: Khawaja Shamsul Islam
ADNAN ABID
VS
MUNAF ATTARA AND OTHERS
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O.VI,Rr.16,17
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 12,54
Law: Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S.)
Section: Rr.126,127
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- ----O.VI, Rr.16 & 17---Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S), Rr.126 & 127---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) Ss. 12 & 54---Suit for specific performance, permanent injunction damages and other penal interests---Defendant in his written statement used words 'all family members are habitual offenders' against family members of the plaintiff---Plaintiff moved an application to strike of remarks from pleadings which was allowed---Deputy Registrar of the Court failed to endorse 'struck off remarks from pleadings', nor amended written statement filed with original---Plaintiff filed another application to seek direction to comply with order of striking off, in view of Rr.126 & 127 of Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S)---Defendant contested application on ground that he failed to contest order of striking off since it contained no direction with regard to striking off the remarks in 'red ink'---Validity---Any party to suit could ask Court to strike out pleadings of other party on grounds that pleadings were shown to be unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious and Court was empowered to strike out any matter in pleadings which tended to be the same along with facts that prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the suit---When court had passed an order to strike out pleadings and order was holding field being unchallenged, failure by party to follow subsequent procedure would not prejudice or affect legality of such order---Rr.126 & 127 of Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S) required that any amendment made in pleadings by omission should be made by striking it out of record with 'red ink' and an amendment proceedings would be filed and annexed to original after being endorsed by Deputy Registrar of the Court---Remarks had been expunged but there was no endorsement by Deputy Registrar which was of no use without endorsement---Application was allowed by High Court and Registrar of the Court was directed to make endorsement in 'red ink' in original which should be followed by filing amended pleadings---Order accordingly. PLD 1991 SC 371 and AIR 1966 Mad. 161 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- ----O. VI, Rr.16…
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