| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 2861 2024 SLD 2861 2024 CLC 262 |
Balochistan High Court
Civil Revision No.813 of 2021, decided on 17th March, 2023.Date of hearing: 16th March, 2023.
Before Gul Hassan Tareen, J
Atta Muhammad Tareen and Najeebullah Kakar for Petitioner. Jamal Khan Lashari for
Respondents Nos.1A to 1-E and 3 and Abdul Tahir, State Counsel for
Respondent No.4.
Civil Revision No.813 of 2021, decided on 17th March, 2023.Date of hearing: 16th March, 2023.
Before Gul Hassan Tareen, J
Atta Muhammad Tareen and Najeebullah Kakar for Petitioner. Jamal Khan Lashari for
Respondents Nos.1A to 1-E and 3 and Abdul Tahir, State Counsel for
Respondent No.4.
BISMILLAH and 2 others----Petitioners
VERSUS
NAIK MUHAMMAD through Legal Heirs----Respondents
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 1,2
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXIII, Rr. 1 & 2 & O. XIII, R. 2---Conditional withdrawal of suit, permission of---Formal defect, absence of---Order of the Court not containing legal reasoning---Effect---Trial Court allowed application moved by the plaintiffs for conditional withdrawal with conditional cost, which order was maintained by the Appellate Court---Contention of the petitioner/ defendant was that application made by the respondents / plaintiffs did not disclose 'formal defect' as they had stated that they were not in possession of some material documents in respect of suit-property and whenever they would be in possession of said documents, they would file a fresh suit---Validity---In an application for conditional withdrawal of suit, 'formal defect' or 'any other sufficient ground' must be mentioned as per O.XXIII, R.1(2)(a) & (b) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, whereas in the present case, respondents / plaintiffs could have collected the required documents to place the same on the record under O. XIII, R. 2 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, thus the reason (documents not being in possession) having been mentioned by the respondent / plaintiffs in their application did not amount to 'formal defect' or 'any other sufficient ground'---Impugned order passed by the Trial Court was brief and non-speaking---Not only an application for conditional withdrawal of suit must contain 'formal defect' but the order passed by the Court must contain legal reasoning also while granting such an application---Application made by the respondents was reason and was liable to be dismissed---Trial Court completely overlooked the contents of the application and provisions of O. XXIII, R. 1 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908---Perusal of impugned order revealed that the Trial Court had not applied at all its judicious mind to the facts as well as the law on the subject; and in a slipshot manner allowed the application of the respondents / plaintiffs---Error committed by he Trial Court was not merely a material illegality but suffered from jurisdictional error and material irregularity---Petitioner assailed the impugned order in appeal; however, the Appellate…
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