| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 542 2025 SLD 542 = 2025 PLD 53 |
Sindh High Court
First Appeal No.38 of 2020, decided on 15th May, 2024.
Before Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui and Sana Akram Minhas, JJ
Hyder Raza Arain for Appellant. Nemo for
Respondent.
First Appeal No.38 of 2020, decided on 15th May, 2024.
Before Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui and Sana Akram Minhas, JJ
Hyder Raza Arain for Appellant. Nemo for
Respondent.
MUMTAZ HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI---Appellant
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD TAHIR---Respondent
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: IX,159
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: XXXVII,2,3IX,13,12(2)
(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)-------First Sched., Art. 159---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXVII, Rr. 2 & 3---Suit for recovery---Summary trial---Application for leave to defend, filing of--Limitation---Specified time of 10 days, commencement of---Scope---Service upon the defendant---Trial Court, responsibility of---On failure of the defendant to file leave to defend application, the Trial Court passed ex-parte judgment and decree; later, Trial Court dismissed the defendant's application under O. IX, R. 13, C.P.C. read with S. 12(2), C.P.C., seeking to set aside the original judgment and decree--Validity---Article 159 of the Limitation Act, 1908 mandates a period of ten (10) days for submitting a leave to defend application in a suit governed by the summary procedure outlined in O. XXXVII of Civil Procedure Code, 1908---Said period commences from the date of service of the summons---Order XXXVII, R. 2, C.P.C., explicitly outlines the procedure for summons, requiring it to be served in Form No.4 of Appendix B, which coincides with the 10-day period stipulated in Art. 159 of Limitation Act, 1908; significance of both the contents and language of Form No.4 necessitates that the party served with the summons has 10 days from the date of service to submit its Leave to Defend Application---In the present case, according to the relevant Diary (Order) Sheet, the service upon the appellant/defendant was held good based on the report of bailiff---However, said report revealed that Appellant was served on such date that the ninth (9th) day (from date of service by bailiff) was next date of hearing i.e. before the full 10-day period as provided by law would have elapsed---When a statute grants a defendant a statutory right to seek leave of the Court within a specified time frame (in the present case 10 days from the receipt of the summons), it establishes a clear procedural safeguard---Trial Court is expected to respect and uphold this statutory provision---By waiting for the expiration of the stipulated period before taking any action, the court ensures that the defendant has a reasonable opportunity to exercise his legal rights and…
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