Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VI, R.17 & O. XLI, R.25---Amendment of pleadings---Appellate Court, jurisdiction of---Framing of additional issues---Scope---Suit filed by plaintiff was dismissed by Trial Court and during pendency of appeal, Lower Appellate Court allowed the plaintiff to amend his plaint and remanded the suit to Trial Court after framing additional issues---Validity---Amendments in pleadings could be allowed at any stage and appeal being continuation of suit / trial, Lower Appellate Court committed no illegality by allowing applications filed by plaintiff---By framing additional issue, Lower Appellate Court acted in accordance with law and such finding was unexceptionable calling for no interference---High Court declined to interfere in the order passed by Lower Appellate Court---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. 1995 CLC 1889 and 1993 CLC 450 distinguished. Tahir Mahmood for Appellants. Sahibzada Nadeem Fareed for Respondent. Date of hearing: 24th June, 2009. JUDGMENT PERVAIZ INAYAT MALIK, J.---Briefly stated the facts as those emerge out of this petition are that the respondent Malik Muhammad Munir filed a suit for Specific Performance of the contract against one Pir Bakhsh on the basis of agreement to sell, dated 15-12-1979 which was dismissed vide judgment and decree, dated 13-2-1995 passed by learned Civil Judge, Muzaffargarh, whereagainst an appeal was preferred by the respondent. During the pendency whereof the respondent Malik Munir Ahmad filed an application seeking amendment of the plaint including therein the relief of possession and also filed an application for producing an additional evidence, which were accepted by the learned appellate Court and case was remanded to the learned trial Court with a direction to frame an additional issue to the following effect:-- Whether the possession of the suit-land was forcibly taken by the defendants? OPP Which order was being assailed through his appeal. 2. It is inter alia contended that the learned lower appellate Court committed an illegality by remanding the case through impugned order nor could the additional issue be directed to be framed; that there…