Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 1121 2012 SLD 1121 2012 PLD 258
Sindh High Court
Civil Suit No.726 of 2008 and C.M.A. No.4938 of 2010, decided on. 12-08-2011
SALMAN HAMID, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Mst. AMINA BAI--Plaintiff

VS

Mrs. NAFISA ZAKARIA and 2 others----Defendants

Law:

Section:

Oath Act (X of 1872)--- ----Ss. 8 & 9---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.163---Disposal of case on special oath proposed by court prior to framing of consent issues and reference of case to local commission with parties' consent for recording evidence---Validity---Plaintiff after filing affidavit-in­evidence before commission had been partly cross-examined by defendant---Such offer having been made by court and not by any party to lis came to an end and was frustrated when consent issues were framed and case was referred to Commissioner---High Court dismissed defendant's application seeking disposal of case on special oath. Atiqullah v. Kifayatullah 1981 SCMR 162 and Nazir Ahmed v. Muhammad Ahmed and others 1984 CLC 2658 ref. ORDER SALMAN HAMID, J.---It seems that this report of the Commissioner dated 18-5-2010 has been wrongly filed in present case inasmuch as it pertains to Suit No.627 of 2006. Office is directed to take out this report and file it in the correct file. 2. Through this report dated 10-6-2011, the Commissioner has reported that on 9-6-2011 examination in chief and part cross-examination of the plaintiff was recorded and the matter was adjourned to 8-9-2011 by consent of all the parties/advocates when the learned counsel for defendant No.1 (Mr. Farooq Hashim) wanted to avail summer vacations of two months and that even the learned Commissioner was on general adjournment w.e.f. 11-6-2011 to 30-7-2011. The plaintiff also requested that owing to the holy month of Ramazan she would not be available for her cross-examination. With consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter was adjourned to 8-9-2011 (a date yet to arrive). Mr. Farooq Hashim, learned counsel for defendant No.l, despite the above exposition, has objected to the grant of further time to the Commissioner in concluding the evidence. Looking at the above, the objection of the learned counsel for defendant No.1 is uncalled for. The Commissioner is allowed further 60 days' time to conclude evidence of the parties, to be reckoned from 8-9-2011. The report of the .Commissioner is disposed of in terms of the above. 3. Order dated 23-2-2010 would disclose that 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