Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 491 2015 SLD 491 2015 PLD 58
Sindh High Court
Civil Revision No. 231 of 2006, decided on 29th August,2014. DATE of hearing: 10th March, 2014
NADEEM AKHTAR, J
Jhamat Jethanand for Applicants. Qammer Mehmood Baig for
Respondent

G.N. CORPORATION (PRIVATE) LTD. through Chief Executive and othersvsMst. JANNAT KHATOON

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XVII,R.3,115

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 8,54

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---O. XVII, R.3-Adjournment-previous default---Penal provision, applicability of---Previous default of a party, if any, is not to be taken note of while considering question under Order XVII, R.3, C.P.C., as the party is entitled to grant of further opportunity or not. Messrs Raheem Steel Re-Rolling Mills and 4 others v. Messrs Karim Aziz Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. 1988 CLC 654; Seth Shivrattan G. Mohatta and another v. Messrs Mohammadi Steamship Co. Ltd. PLD 1965 SC 669 and Babu Jan Muhammad and others v. Dr. Abdul Ghafoor and others PLD 1966 SC 461 rel. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss.8 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115 & O.XVII, R.3---Suit for possession and injunction-Non-compliance of order--- Penal provision, invoking of---Pre-condition---Trial Court declined to adjourn the case on the ground that plaintiff failed to comply with order passed on previous date resultantly suit was dismissed---Lower Appellate Court set aside the order passed by Trial Court-Validity-In order to attract penal provisions of O. XVII, of R.3, C.P.C., time must have been granted by Court to party for doing any of the acts mentioned therein on the next date---Time must be granted by Court at the request of defaulting party---Party must be in default on the next date in complying with direction given to him by Court at his request-If time was not granted by Court on previous date at the instance of party, against whom order was required to be made, then punitive provisions of 0.XVII, R.3, C.P.C. would not be applied against such party though in default on next date-Revisional jurisdiction could be exercised only in case of non-assumption or illegal assumption of jurisdiction or where jurisdiction was exercised illegally or with material irregularity---High Court declined to interfere in passed by Lower Appellate Court as the same was in accordance with law-Revision was dismissed in circumstances. Shahid Hussain v. Muhammad Akram 2000 SCMR 1135; Kamran Co. and others v. Messrs Modern Motors and another PLD 1990 SC 715; Nawsheri Khan v. Said Ahmed Shah, 1983 SCMR 1092; Industrial Sales and Service, Karachi and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register