| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2297 2015 SLD 2297 2015 CLC 761 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 661 of 2014, decided on 25th June, 2014.
SHAHID, JAMIL KHAN, J
Jawad Mehboob Awan for Petitioners. Kamran Ali for
Respondent
Civil Revision No. 661 of 2014, decided on 25th June, 2014.
SHAHID, JAMIL KHAN, J
Jawad Mehboob Awan for Petitioners. Kamran Ali for
Respondent
KHALID IBRAHIM through L.Rs. and others
VS
Chaudhry MAZHAR HUSSAIN and others
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) --- ----O. XLI, R. 27 & O. XIII, R. 2---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.42---Suit for declaration---Additional evidence, production of---Requirements---Condition---Good cause---Words "in the Appellate Court" mentioned in O.XLI, R.27, C.P.C.---Scope---Remand of case---Scope---Suit was dismissed against which an appeal was filed wherein an application for additional evidence was moved---Appellate Court accepted application for production of additional evidence and remanded the case for decision afresh with the direction to the Trial Court to allow the defendant to produce the documentary evidence---Validity---Production of additional evidence had been discouraged as a rule and permission for its production was an exception---Permission for production of additional evidence could be granted only on showing good cause for its non-production to the satisfaction of court---Trial Court was required to satisfy itself on good cause as to why production of documentary evidence was prevented earlier---Appellate Court was required to record reasons for admission of application for production of additional evidence subject to fulfillment of conditions mentioned in O.XLI, R.27, C.P.C.---Appellate Court was bound to decide the case itself if permission for additional evidence had been granted by the said court---Appeal was a continuation of proceedings and if any error, misreading or non-reading was found by the Appellate Court then said court was required to correct the same in the appellate proceedings---Appellate Court was not justified to remand the case after accepting application for production of additional document---Impugned passed by the Appellate Court was set aside---Application for production of additional evidence should be deemed to be pending before the Appellate Court which should be decided by the said court afresh---Revision was accepted in circumstances. Syed Muhammad Hassan Shah and others v. Mst. Binat-e-Fatima and another PLD 2008 SC 564 rel. ORDER SHAHID JAMEEL KHAN, J.--- This revision petition is filed against judgment and decree dated 24-5-2014 passed by Additional District Judge, Rawalpindi, Camp at Murree.…
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