| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 1365 2025 SLD 1365 = 2025 SCP 174 |
Civil Petition No. 3875 of 2024 (Against the order dated 20.06.2024 of the Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench (Dar-ul-Qaza), Swat passed in C.R No.266-M/2024)
Mr. Justice Yahya Afridi, CJ Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb
Khurshed Ali Khan. … Petitioner
VERSUS
Muhammad Ayub and others. … Respondents
Law: Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Section: 151, Order IX Rule 8, Order IX Rule 9, Order XVII Rules 2 & 3
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: 5
Summary
The petitioner’s suit was dismissed for non-prosecution after the plaintiff’s counsel failed to appear on the date fixed for evidence, despite the presence of defendants. A belated restoration application citing illness was rejected as insufficient and time-barred. Both the trial court and appellate court refused restoration. The petitioner’s argument that the suit should not have been dismissed due to pending applications was found unconvincing because, after issues are framed, the suit is ripe for hearing and liable for dismissal if the plaintiff is absent. The higher court declined leave to appeal, upholding the dismissal.
Core Points
Dismissal for Non-Prosecution:
Suit dismissed when plaintiff failed to appear after issues were framed and case was fixed for evidence.