| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 762 2020 SLD 762 2020 CLC 659 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 655 of 2018, decision & hearing Date : 13-06-2019
RASAAL HASAN SYED, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Sajjad Hussain Tangra
Respondent(s) by: Syed Muhammad Najam-ul-Saqib Mumtaz
Civil Revision No. 655 of 2018, decision & hearing Date : 13-06-2019
RASAAL HASAN SYED, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Sajjad Hussain Tangra
Respondent(s) by: Syed Muhammad Najam-ul-Saqib Mumtaz
MUHAMMAD ASLAM
VS
HAJI ABDUL HAKIM KHAN
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 12(2),O,XXXVII,2
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 33
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.12(2) & O. XXXVII, R. 2---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 33---Summary suit--- Fraud and misrepresentation---Appointment of a referee on the statement of counsel for the parties---Scope---Decree, setting aside of---Parties jointly expressed their intention for resolution of controversy through their counsel---Referee was appointed on the statements of the counsel for the parties---Refree submitted his report---Trial Court passed decree in the light of report of referee---Contention of petitioner was that he had not authorized his counsel to record conceding statement---Petition for setting aside of a decree was dismissed by the Trial Court---Validity---Referee could only furnish information to the Court as per his personal knowledge---Acquisition of such knowledge was to precede appointment of referee and not subsequent thereto---Such information when furnished did assume the character of an admission of the parties and result in a decision of the lis on the basis thereof---Where a person was called upon to decide the suit after receiving evidence and hearing arguments or collecting material then his role could not be termed as of a referee---Where referee proceeded to examine the witness, hear the parties to reach a conclusion or resolve the dispute then his conclusion would be a decision which could not be treated by the Court as a statement of the referee---Trial Court had proceeded in a mechanical manner and passed a decree on the assumption as if it was statement by referee---Appointment of a counsel as referee could not denude the petitioner of his right to object and challenge the report on the ground of collusion and transgression of mandate as referee---Parties, in the present case, never agreed that referee should record statement but dispute was entrusted to the referee for decision---Mere using of the word "referee" could not render the report to be deemed to be an information in his personal knowledge to make it an admission under Art. 33 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---No evidence had been recorded by the referee nor any inquiry had been conducted before filing report before the Court---Report of…
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