| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 2070 2021 SLD 2070 2021 PLJ 532 |
Lahore High Court
C.R. No. 691 of 2011, heard on 3.4.2019, Date of hearing: 3.4.2019.
RASAAL HASAN SYED, JUSTICE.
Mr. Awais Ahmed Qazi, Advocate for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
C.R. No. 691 of 2011, heard on 3.4.2019, Date of hearing: 3.4.2019.
RASAAL HASAN SYED, JUSTICE.
Mr. Awais Ahmed Qazi, Advocate for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD YAQOOB
VS
MUHAMMAD HANIF THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND OTHERS
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 12
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 115,13
Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----S. 12--Civil Procedure Code, (V of 1908), S. 115, O.IX, R. 13--Suit for declaration--Ex-parte decreed--Application for setting aside ex-parte decree--Report of ahlmad--Application was dismissed--Appeal--Dismissed--Non-framing of issue--Non-recording of evidence--Validity of orders--Non-delivering of notices to petitioners--Plea of limitation in order of Court--Right to bring evidence--Opportunity of proper hearing--Non-following of legal course--Challenge to--Addl. District Judge, did not consider application on merit, rather opted to dismiss same on assumption that it was barred by time--Addl. District Judge, did not even refer relevant provision of Limitation Act, 1908 which was applicable on subject nor had attempted to consider parameters given therein--None of notices was ever delivered to petitioner and that reports on basis thereof as well as publication and ex-parte order were legally untenable--No issue was framed either on plea of limitation or on merits to application, yet Civil Judge vide order dated 18.6.2010 dismissed application for setting aside of decree on assumption that all possible measures were adopted for obtaining service including publication in newspaper and therefore, application was without any prima facie support to contention raised therein. Addl. District Judge, dismissing appeal on assumption of application being barred by time, did not touch findings on merits of application--It was also required to be determined whether a declaration of all efforts to procure direct service having remained unsuccessful was ever made by Court after examining process server as required by Order V, Rule 19, C.P.C. before passing an order of publication of notice in newspaper and whether there was any basis or material from which knowledge could be assumed had right to bring evidence on record to prove that there was no lawful service, he had no knowledge of decree and thus reports were collusive and fictitious--This opportunity was never granted as no issue was framed nor case was fixed for recording evidence--Trial Court did not frame any issue as to sufficient cause for annulment of decree which denied…
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