| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1980 SLG 629 1980 SLD 629 1980 PLD 435 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 444 of 1980, decided on 20th January, 1980
MUHAMMAD ZAIN-UL-ABIDIN, J
Ch. Muhammad Yaqub Sidhu for Petitioner.
Writ Petition No. 444 of 1980, decided on 20th January, 1980
MUHAMMAD ZAIN-UL-ABIDIN, J
Ch. Muhammad Yaqub Sidhu for Petitioner.
NASRULLAH KHAN AND anothers
VS
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, GUJRANWALA AND 2 others--Respondents
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- O. XVI, r. 1-Witnesses, summoning of-Court, can in its discretion condone on showing good cause any omission either in presenting list or names of witnesses-Contention regarding sub-rule (1) of r. 1, O. XVI, C. P. C., being mandatory and its non-compliance resulting in closing case of party in matter of evidence, held, misconceived.-[Witness]. . In rule I of Order XVl by sub-rule (2), C.P.C. discretion has been left with the Court to condone any omission in respect of witnesses which includes also omission in respect of filing list of witnesses, because in both cases there would be an omission in presenting list of witnesses to be called through Court. The only condition on which discretion is to be exercised is that good cause would be shown by party who invokes discretionary jurisdiction of the Court. Normally a person who has presented his claim for adjudication in the Court and opposite-party has been called upon by Court to answer his claim and controversy between parties is reduced to issues is entitled to prove his claim and it seems unfair on the part of the Court to shut the case of one or other party merely because, a step in proceedings has been delayed on account of inadvertent omission or bona fide cause. Ordinarily discretion has to be exercised for benefit of litigant party unless it is proved that party at fault is guilty of contumacious conduct or negligence not excusable reasonsably. It is, therefore, misconceived that sub-rule (1) is mandatory and its non-compliance will result in closing case of a party in matter of evidence. Messrs Crescent Films, Lahore v. Messrs Shah Noor Films Ltd., Lahore and 8 others P L D 1978 Lab. 721 ; H. M. Sadiq & Co., Lyallpur v. Volkart (Pak.) Ltd, Karachi P L D 1976 Lab. 1460 and Rana Taleh Muhammad Khali and another v. Additional District Judge, Sheikhupura and 12 others P L D 1979 Lab. 145 ref. JUDGMENT In this writ petition the grievance of the petitioner is that the learned Civil Judge has accepted the application of the respondent for presenting the list of witnesses two years after the framing of issues in violation of the provisions of rule 1 of Order XVI, C. P. C.…
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