| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLD 1731 = 1991 CLC 1460 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.1959 of 1989, heard on 3rd April, 1991.
Presented By: Before Ch. Amjad Khan, J .
Taqi Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
Civil Revision No.1959 of 1989, heard on 3rd April, 1991.
Presented By: Before Ch. Amjad Khan, J .
Taqi Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD SADIQ---Petitioner
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD SADIQ and others---Respondents
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 115
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.XIV, R.1 & S.115---Appellate Court without adverting to evidence existing on record, remanded case to trial Court to decide the same afresh after framing other issues arising from pleadings of parties---Failure to frame one or the other issues at the trial stage, would not nullify the trial because it was the duty of parties to get proper issues framed, if they had any objection or suggestion regarding framing of issues---Appellate Court should make every effort itself to decide appeal on basis of evidence existing on record instead of frequently remanding case---Appeals having not been dealt with properly by Appellate Court below High Court remanded same to be decided afresh in accordance with law. 1988 S C M R 4; 1985 S C M R 1 and Pramatha Nath Chowdhury v. Kamir Mondal P L D 1965 SC 434 ref. Taqi Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 3rd April, 1991. JUDGMENT One Civil Suit No.27 of 1988 brought by Mohammad Sadiq, a Dhobi, against Mohammad Malik for declaration of title in a shop and another suit bearing C.S. No.26 of 1988 for a decree for possession of the same shop, brought by Muhammad Sadiq (a Sheikh and brother of the above-named Muhammad Malik) 32 persons in all; were considered and after contest decided on 25-5-1988 by the trial Court to decree the first-mentioned suit (No.27) of Mohammad Sadiq Dhobi against Mohammad Malik and dismiss the second suit of the other Mohammad Sadiq Sheikh and 31 others. Two appeals thereagainst brought by the losing party of Mohammad Malik, one in his own name and the other by all 32 losing plaintiffs, came up for hearing before Mr. Tasawwar Hussain Qureshi, Additional District Judge, Sialkot who, without adverting to the evidence existing on the record, proceeded to accept both the appeals by the judgment dated 25-7-1989 by remanding the cases to the trial Court with the direction as under:--------- "to frame other issues that clearly arise from the pleadings of the parties as discussed above and decide the cases afresh in accordance with law." Appellate Judge observed in para: 12 of his judgment, "1t is an admitted law that…