Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 4020 1996 SLD 4020 , 1996 PLD 32
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No. 103 of 1994, decided on 20th November, 1995.
Presented By: Before Jawad Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J
Haji Saadullah Khan Miankhel for Petitioner. Muhammad Khan Khakwani for
Respondents.

WARESHMIN KHAN---Defendant/Petitioner

VERSUS

UMAR DARAZ KHAN and others---Plaintiffs/Respondents

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---O. VI, R.17 & S. 115---Amendment of written statement---Essentials--- Power to permit amendment of pleadings is discretionary with Court, but such discretion should be exercised in accordance with judicial principles viz. to avoid multiplicity of suits to advance substantial justice; and to preserve right of litigants-- -Power to amend written statement could only be refused where same was based on mala fides---While deciding question of amendment of written statement, basic rule is that defendants should not be allowed to make new case and amendment of written statement was ordinarily not to be allowed where plaintiff had closed his evidence, however, same could be allowed where defendant had acted in good faith---Where, however, defendant was allowed to amend written statement then plaintiff must also be given opportunity to meet such amendment i.e. by allowing him to file replication to such amendment or even by leading further evidence, if necessary---Allowing defends to amend their written statements, would preserve right of litigants, avoid multiplicity o: proceedings and advance interest of substantial justice---Application submitted by defendants in lower Appellate Court for amendment of written statement was allowed, subject to payment of costs---Case was remanded to Trial Court with direction that after defendant had filed his amended written statement, plaintiffs be allowed to file replication---After framing fresh issues parties be given opportunity of producing evidence at their option and then to decide the case on merits in accordance with law. Imtiaz Ahmad v. Ghulam Ali PLD 1963 SC 382; Dino Manekji Chinoy v. Muhammad Matin PLD 1984 SC 3; Mst. Ghulam Bibi and others v. Sarsa Khan and others PLD 1985 SC 345; Ghulam Nabi v. Sardar Nazir Ahmad 1985 SCMR 824; Ali Hussain v. Late Ali Ahmad Khan Warsi PLD 1984 SC 1; Manzoor Hussain v. Sajawar 1983 SCMR 465; Muhammad Ismail v. Muhammad Sarwar 1980 SCMR 254; Secretary to Government West Pakistan v. Kazi Abdul Kafil PLD 1978 SC 264; Syed Akhlaque Hussain v. WAPDA, Lahore 1977 SCMR 284; Zubeda Begum v. Wali Muhammad Khan 1974 SCMR 181; National Shipping…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register