Case Details

Citation(s)
1992 SLD 844 = 1992 CLC 1731
Lahore High Court
Civil Rev. No.1451 of 1990, decided of on 11th December, 1991.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Amir Mallick, J
Yousuf Kazmi for Petitioner. Syed Mumtaz Hussain Jaffary for
Respondent.

TARIQ ADREES---Petitioner

VERSUS

Syed RIZWAN HUSSAIN BOKHART --- Respondent

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

  Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revision---Competency---Disposal of two appeals by Appellate Court---Plaintiff's appeal against dismissal of his suit was accepted and his suit was decreed, while defendants claim for set-off was rejected---One revision filed by defendant against such orders---Disposal of reliefs claimed by respective parties being by same judgment only one revision was competent-- All connected matters could be taken in revision at the same time, by High Court. Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revision---Plaintiffs claim for recovery of specified  amount  and  defendant's  claim  for set-off---Appellate Court, while decreeing plaintiff's suit not only misappreciated evidence but recorded wrong statement of facts in its judgment---Decree granted by Appellate Court was set aside, while that of trial Court, whereby it had dismissed plaintiffs suit as also defendant's claim for set-off, was restored. Yousuf Kazmi for Petitioner. Syed Mumtaz Hussain Jaffary for Respondent. Date of hearing: 11th December, 1991. JUDGMENT   Syed Rizwan Hussain Bokhari respondent filed a suit against Tariq Adrees petitioner for recovery of Rs.25,000. The learned Civil Judge vide his judgment dated 25-11-1989 dismissed the same. The claim of the petitioner for set-off of Rs.14,000 was also disallowed. Both the parties appealed. The Addl. Distt. Judge vide judgment and decree dated 9-6-1990 decreed the suit of Syed Rizwan Hussain and dismissed the appeal of the petitioner as to set-off. The same has been challenged in the revision petition. Preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the respondent that there being two orders one decreeing the suit for Rs.25,000 and the other disallowing the appeal for the set-off of Rs.14,000 two revisions should have been riled. The objection is too technical one. The disposal of the reliefs claimed by the respective parties being by the same judgment A only one revision petition is competent. Even otherwise as many matters as are connected can be taken in revision at the same time by the High Court. The facts lie in a very narrow…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register