Case Details

Citation(s)
1979 SLG 199 1979 SLD 199 1979 PLD 546
Sindh High Court
Civil Revision No. 441 of 1978, decided on 8th November, 1978. Dates of hearing: 1st and 8th November, 1978.
AFTAB HUSSAIN, J
Abdul Hayee Mansoor Ahmad for Appellant. Sh. Abdur Rashid for
Respondent No. 1. Zakaur Rehman Khan Lodhi for
Respondent No. 2.

Mst. NAZIR BEGUM AND another--Appellants

VS

Sheikh ABDUL RASHID AND another--Respondents

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- --0. VIII, r. 11 read with O. VII, rr. 20, 22, 23 & 25 and O. III, r. 5-Filing of form of address for service-Object of provision of r. 11 of O. VIII-To evolve a procedure for service on a party where no counsel engaged or where counsel disabled to serve a party during proceedings of suit-Language of rule couched in mandatory terms and linked with penalty clause-Defendant putting in appearance in Court-Held, bound to file his form of address for service. The object of this provision is patently clear from rule 11 of Order VIII and rules 20, 22, 23 and 25 of Order VII. It is to evolve a procedure in addition to the procedure for service on a party described in Order III, rule 5 which may be abortive where no counsel is engaged or for example where the counsel is disabled to serve a party during proceedings of a suit. This object would be defeated if the rule is interpreted in the manner in which the learned counsel for the petitioner would wish the Court to interpret it. The clear object of the rule is that if the defendant has put in appearance, he is bound to file his form of address for service. It is for this reason that the language of the rule in relation to address is couched in mandatory terms and is linked with a penalty clause. Municipal Committee, Lahore v. Kesho Ram A I R 1929 Lab. 459 ref. Joti Ram v. Bell Ram-Barkat Ram A I R 1935 Lab. 791 and Shamroz Khan and another v. Muhammad Amin and others P L D 1978 S C 89 distinguished. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- 0. VII, r. 23 read with O. VIII, r. 11(3)-Provision of r. 23, O. VII Held, of general applicability and not confined to parda nashin ladies. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- -- S. 115 read with O. VIII, r. 12-Exercise of discretion by Court under r. 12, O. VIII not found to be injudicious or arbitrary--Held, cannot be interfered with by High Court in exercise of jurisdiction under S. 115.-[Revision (civil)]. JUDGMENT This is a petition against the order dated 8-11-1977 passed by the learned trial Court striking off the defence of the petitioners under Order VIII, rule 12, C. P. C. for their failure to file their form of address after their…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492