Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 630 2022 SLD 630 2022 MLD 250
Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan
Civil Revision No.14 of 2016, decided on 20th September, 2021. Date of hearing: 20th September, 2021.
AHMAD NADEEM ARSHAD, JUSTICE
Tahir Mehmood for Petitioners. Abdul Majeed Khan Balooch and Malik Zafar Iqbal Markund for
Respondents.

MST. ZOHRAN BIBI AND OTHErs

VS

GHULAM QADIR AND OTHERS

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 16,18,19,13,17,6

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 164,181

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.V, Rr.16, 18, 19 O.IX, R.13---Inheritance---Ex-parte decree passed without recording evidence---Notice, service of---Application of petitioners (sister of respondents/plaintiffs) for setting aside ex-parte decree was concurrently dismissed on the grounds of limitation and due service---Validity---Report of the Process Server was not on oath---Such service was not in accordance with mandatory provisions of law---Ex-parte decree was to be set-aside if the summonses were not duly served---Process Server was not summoned and examined on oath by the Court before initiating ex-parte proceedings to testify his report of service---Summons was neither witnessed by anybody from the locality nor any independent person was reported to be present at that time nor any affidavit was given in that regard---Endorsement on the back of summons was not in prescribed manner---No mention of identifying the person served as to who had identified the defendants/petitioners---Ex-parte decree was passed without recording of any evidence---Merits of the case were not touched by the Trial Court, therefore, its recall could be considered under the provision of O.IX, R.13, C.P.C. remained silent and moved application before revenue officers for implantation of impugned decree after 34 years thereofs got knowledge about impugned /decree through said application and limitation would start from such knowledge---No evidence available to prove knowledge of evidence otherwises were Parda observing illiterate village ladies and no independent advice was available to them against the opponents who were their real brothers enjoying undue influence being male members of family---Revision petition was accepted accordingly. Syed Mazhar Shahs case 1990 MLD 1070; Haji Karamat Hussains case 1986 CLC 6 and State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan v. Messrs Ibrahim Management Ltd. and others 1990 CLC 206 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.V, Rr.17, 19 O.IX, R. 6---Due service---Proof---For defending an ex-parte proceedings and decree the plaintiff had to produce the process server to prove due service when the service was denied by the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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