Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 2,8

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 181

(a) Civil Procedure code (V of 1908)--- ----O.IX, R.8 O.XVII, R.2---Suit was dismissed for non-appearance---When entire evidence is available with the court to make final decision after going through the same---At such stage while attracting provisions of O. IX, C.P.C., the dismissal of suit for default is not justified. Muhammad Haleem and others v. H.H Muhammad Naim and others PLD 1969 SC 270; Khan Ali Ahmad Khan Lodhi v. Tabarak Ahmad Khan and others PLD 1960 (W.P) Lahore 129; M/s Shafiq Cloth House and others v. Muslim Commercial Bank Limited 1976 Law Notes (SC) 677; Mst. Shamshad Begum alias Sharam Khatoon v. District and Sessions Judge, Dadu through Presiding Officer and others 1998 CLC 1128; Muhammad Hussain and 17 others v. Abdul Hameed and 4 others PLD 2019 Bal. 106; Allah Rakha and others v. Muhammad Yousuf and others PLD 1991 SC 601 and Mst. Shahida Zareem v. Iqrar Ahmad Siddiqui 2010 SCMR 1119 ref. (b) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----Art.181---Application for restoration of suit---Limitation---Question of limitation in respect of application seeking restoration of suit is only relevant, if dismissal itself is proper---In the present case the order of dismissed in default was null and void, the appropriate Art. 181, of the First Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1908, and in this view of matter, the application for re-admission of suit could not have been treated time barred---Nothing wrong was committed on the part of petitioners that their suit could be dismissed for default, but for a below definitely committed material irregularity---Above circumstances the impugned concurrent order being coram non judice/ultra vires, besides suffering from jurisdictional defect neither can be protected nor perpetuated--- Consequently petition is allowed, order impugned herein were set aside and application for restoration of main suit succeeds resulting in its re-admission---The parties are directed to appeared before court of competent jurisdiction for further proceedings. Abdul Latif and another v. Aqeel Ahmad 2006 SCMR 789; Mst. Suraya Parveen v. Mst. Rukhsana Hanif and others 2012 SCMR 656 and Messrs Transglobe Shipping Service v. WAPDA and others 2016 SCMR…

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