Case Details

Citation(s)
1995 SLG 683 1995 SLD 683 , 1995 PLD 81
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No.201 of 1993, decided on 2nd November, 1994. -------
Presented By: Before Mian Shakirullah Jan, J
Muhammad Rafique Khan for Petitioners. Malik Muhammad Bashir Khan for
Respondent

MUMTAZ BIBI and others---Petitioners

VERSUS

GHULAM AKBAR---Respondent

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 12 , 2

P L D 1995 Peshawar 81 Civil Revision No.201 of 1993, decided on 2nd November, 1994. Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 12(2)---Judgment and decree obtained on basis of fraud and misrepresentation---Setting aside of ---Declaratory suit filed by plaintiff/respondent against petitioner having been dismissed in default, application for restoration of that suit was filed by plaintiff/respondent-- Notice was issued to petitioner in application for restoration of suit and respondent was directed to file correct address of petitioner/defendant and also registered envelope m Court for serving through a registered post notice-- Respondent instead of complying with orders of Court, submitted application for advertisement in Newspaper which was done accordingly in a newspaper of limited circulation having its place of publication in a different Province, thus, normal course of service of summons or process was not adopted by respondent in the case---After publication, on the next date of hearing, petitioner/defendant, who was involved in criminal case and was already absconder and was not available, was proceeded ex parte and case was fixed for recording ex parte evidence and after recording ex parte evidence, a decree as prayed for by plaintiff/respondent was granted to him---Proceedings of Courts below initiated and conducted at instance of respondent were clearly showed that conduct of respondent was such which could lead one to believe that he had not come to Court with clean hands and that he had concealed facts from Court and thus became able to obtain judgment and decree on basis of misrepresentation and fraud Application filed by petitioner/defendant under S. 12 (2), C.P.C against plaintiff/respondent was accepted and judgment and decree proved to have been obtained on basis of fraud and mirepresentation, were set aside and case was set aside and case was sent back to be decided afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioner. . Date of hearing : 2nd November, 1994. JUDGMENT The present revision petition is the result of an order dated 11-10-1993 of the learned trial Court vide which an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. of the…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register