Law: Constitution of Pakistan 1973

Section: 25

Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 5, 4, 1, 2, 5, 3, 151

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984

Section: 20, 22, 49, 115, 118 & 119 , 122, 129(g), 161

 Summary

The plaintiff filed a suit challenging the CDA's cancellation of an industrial plot and sought declaration, possession, or, alternatively, allotment of an equivalent plot if the original plot could not be delivered. During trial, the plaintiff requested production of CDA's records relating to alternative plots allotted to other allottees, arguing that such evidence was necessary to prove his entitlement to an alternative plot. The trial court rejected the request, holding that the plaintiff was attempting to fill lacunae in his case.

The Islamabad High Court allowed the constitutional petition and set aside the impugned order. The Court held that the trial court had incorrectly equated the legal burden of proof with the evidential burden. While the plaintiff bore the legal burden of proving his claim, the evidential burden regarding records exclusively in the custody of CDA rested upon CDA under Article 122 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. As a public authority and custodian of public records, CDA could not refuse to produce relevant documents necessary for adjudication. The Court emphasized that the CPC provides trial courts with multiple procedural tools—including discovery, inspection, interrogatories, notices to admit facts, additional issues, and production of documents—to discover the truth rather than remain passive spectators.

The matter was remanded to the trial court with liberty to adopt any appropriate procedural mechanism for obtaining the relevant record and deciding the controversy.