| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 3195 = 1981 SLD 3195 = 1981 PLD 513 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 170 of 1.975, decided on 4th April, 1981. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 28-11-1975, passed in Civil Misc. No. 3988/C/1973 in C. R. No. 346 of 1973).
Presented By: Muhammad Haleem, Actg. C. J. and Muhammad Afzal Zullah, J
Sh. Abdur Rashid, Advocate and Sh. Masud Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for .Appellant. Mian Fazle-Mahmood, Senior Advocate for
Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 170 of 1.975, decided on 4th April, 1981. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 28-11-1975, passed in Civil Misc. No. 3988/C/1973 in C. R. No. 346 of 1973).
Presented By: Muhammad Haleem, Actg. C. J. and Muhammad Afzal Zullah, J
Sh. Abdur Rashid, Advocate and Sh. Masud Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for .Appellant. Mian Fazle-Mahmood, Senior Advocate for
Respondent.
JAN MUHAMMAD-Appellant
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD ASGHAR-Respondent
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 115, 151
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) S. 115 read with S. 151--Restoration of revision application Sufficient cause-Sufficiency of cause so as to justify restoration-To be determined in peculiar circumstances of each case-A fact considered in context of one set of circumstances and background might prove sufficient cause but same fact considered in different set of circumstances might not constitute sufficient cause-Court however to exercise discre tion on due appreciation of facts and circumstances of case but such discretion to be exercised in accordance with accepted judicial principles.-[Revision (civil)]. Link (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) S. 115 read with S. 151-Revision-Dismissal-Restoration Sufficient cause-High Court dismissing revision inter alia on ground of petitioner's attorney having failed to appear in court-room in response to case being called thrice-.Affidavit relied upon by High Court with regard to presence of such attorney outside court-room not containing any assertion to such effect-Case not shown to be not a case of misreading of a highly important material before High Court-Not possible in circumstances to assume that if High Court would not have been influenced by such allegedly adverse conduct exhibiting neglect, bordering on contumaciousness, it would have refused restoration of revision petition-Question of sufficiency of cause of action, in circumstances, held, needed to be examined by excluding influence of aforementioned circumstance and just and proper to remand case for fresh decision.-[Revision (civil)-Remand of case]. Link Date of hearing : 4th April 1981. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--This appeal through special leave calls in question order, dated 28-11-1975, whereby a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dismissed an application for restoration of appellant's Civil Revision, which had earlier…