| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1953 SLG 148 1953 SLD 148 1953 PLD 460 |
Lahore High Court
Second Appeal No. 350 of 1951, decided on 16th June 1953, from the decree of A. Lazarus, District Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 11th July 1951, affirming that of Salah-ud-Din Hanif, Senior Civil Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 23rd January 1951
B. Z. KAIKAUS, J
S. A. Mahmood, Assistant Advocate-General for Appellant,
Respondent in person
Second Appeal No. 350 of 1951, decided on 16th June 1953, from the decree of A. Lazarus, District Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 11th July 1951, affirming that of Salah-ud-Din Hanif, Senior Civil Judge, Gujranwala, dated the 23rd January 1951
B. Z. KAIKAUS, J
S. A. Mahmood, Assistant Advocate-General for Appellant,
Respondent in person
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
VS
MUHAMMAD IQBAL
Law:
Section:
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),S. 80-Substantial compliance with provisions sufficient--Notice to General Manager Commercial, N. W. R. and addressed to General Manager, Claims Section, held, proper-Notice received by proper person, but not so addressed, held sufficient. A technical compliance with the provisions of section 80, C. P. C. is not essential. It is one thing to say that the provision about notice is mandatory and it is another to say that compliance is to be literal. All that is needed is a substantial compliance. The object of the notice is that information be given to the party concerned of the suit that is to be filed and if the notice substantially fulfils that object it is valid. Organisation Order N. W. R. No. 170 shows there are no less than fifteen different sections mentioned in that Organisation Order. It does not mean that there are fifteen General Managers, but only that there are fifteen sections of his office. Though the notice under section 80 was to the General Manager Commercial the address given was only "General Manager, Claims Section." Little fault can be found with a notice which bears this address. The fact that defendant admits receipt of notice in the written statement is sufficient by itself to debar the defendant from taking my objection as to proper service of notice, though the objection is to its sufficiency may yet remain. Apart from the legal effect of an admission in the written statement, even if a notice is proved to have been received by the proper person and dealt with by him, though is was not addressed to the proper person, the service is sufficient. [Case-law referred to]. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 80---Notice to General Manager, N. W. R. not stated that suit would be filed against Federation of Pakistan but saying instead that suit would be filed against "you" Notice, held, not objectionable. The notice did not say that a suit was to be filed against the Federation of Pakistan, but used the word `you' which would indicate that the `General Manager, Commercial' was to be sued. Held, if on the reading of the notice either the person concerned in fact understood that intention was to sue…
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