Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLG 739 1988 SLD 739 = 1988 PLD 60
Quetta High Court
Constitutional Petition No.290 of 1987, decided on 26th May, 1988.
Presented By: Abdul Qadeer Chaudhary, C.J. and Amrir-ul-Mulk Mengal,
Yahya Bakhtiar for Petitioners. Basharatullah for
Respondent No.l.

Syed ABDULLAH SHAH and 3 others --Petitioners

VERSUS

ABDUL GHAFFAR and another-- Respondents

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Ordinance (I of 1968)----- S.4(1)--Words "matters" or "issues" --Meaning, scope and import of --Word "matter" means necessary facts constituting claim or defence--Facts material to issue, substance as distinguished from form, event, occurrence and subject-matter of controversy would also connote '"matter"--Word "issue" could be defined as a single, certain and material point, deduced by pleadings of parties, affirmed by one side and denied by the other--Issues arose out of pleadings when 3 fact or conclusion . of law was maintained by one party and controverted by the other--Non-framing of issues would not be fatal to s case where parties had not been prejudiced. Balck's Law Dictionary rel. (b) Words and phrases----- Words "matter" and "issue"--Connotation of. The word "matter" means necessary facts constituting claim or defence. "Matter" also means substantial facts forming basis of claim or defence; facts material to issue, substance as distinguished from form; transaction, event, occurrence, subject-matter of controversy; and "issue" has been defined "a single, certain, and material point, deduced by the pleadings of the parties, which is affirmed on the one side and denied on other--Issues 'arise out of the pleadings when a fact or conclusion of law is maintained by one party and controverted by the other. (c) Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Ordinance (I of, 1968)----- S.4(2)--Non-framing of issues--Effect of--In the scheme of Ordinance I of 1968, technicalities and defects could not be extended to nullify decisions which were otherwise just and based on material facts--Referring authority 'has discretion either to frame formal issues for determination by Tribunal or refer the matter as it is, to Tribunal provided, parties are not prejudiced thereby--Where no such objection was ever raised before Tribunal about non-framing of issues during long pendency of matter, parties would not be deemed to have been prejudiced and case could not be remanded on that score. P L D 1971 S C 82 ref. (d)…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register