Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 2792 2015 SLD 2792 2015 PLJ 68
Peshawar High Court
C.R. No. 1510 of 2006, decided on 31.10.2014.
WAQAR AHMAD SETH, J.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

CHAIRMAN WAPDA, WAPDA HOUSE, Lahore and 4 others

VS

M/s. SITARA MARBLES INDUSTRY through Managing Director Nowshera KalaN---Respondent

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- ----S. 115--Civil revision--Obligatory to annex/accompany all commanded documents and record with civil revision and High Court is duty bound to give effect to legal provisions--Validity--It is one of obligations of every Court to give effect to each and every provisions of each and every law--No application filed under Section 115, CPC, are entertained unless accompanied by copies of commanded documents and record--Since under Section 115(i), CPC, petitioners were bound to produce complete certified copies of all exhibited documents of case with his petition/ thus, petitioners would be liable to suffer loss for non producing such copies, therefore, High Court had to decide instant petition on basis of available record--High Court in its revisional jurisdiction under Section 115, CPC, unless such findings suffer from jurisdiction defect, illegality or material irregularity, thus jurisdiction to interfere in concurrent findings was very limited. [Pp. 71 & 72] A, B, C & D Judgment This revision petition is directed against the judgment and decree dated 28.09.2006 passed in Civil Appeal No. 30/13 of 2006 whereby the Learned District Judge, Nowshera, dismissed the appeal of petitioners/defendants against the judgment and decree passed by the Learned Civil Judge-III Nowshera, vide his judgment and decree dated 20.03.2006. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that respondent/plaintiff had brought a suit against the petitioners/defendants for declaration and perpetual injunction to the effect that the respondent/plaintiff is regularly paying the Electricity Bills as and when received from the petitioners/defendants; that on 28.04.1998, the petitioners/defendants issued a bill amounting to Rs. 119002/- to the respondent/plaintiff wherein, the consumed units were shown as (817) and thereafter they disconnected the Electricity Supply of the respondent/plaintiff and on 11.01.1999 another bill of Rs. 2,3357/- for payment which is wrong illegal and ineffective upon the rights of the respondent/plaintiff. The petitioners/defendants contested the suit by filing written statement wherein they raised legal and factual…
🔒
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