Case Details

Citation(s)
1981 SLG 1521 1981 SLD 1521 1981 PLD 508
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 457 of 1976, decided on 12th April, 1981
MUHAMMAD ILYAS, J
Birjees Nagy for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent

ALLAH DITTA

VS

AZIZ DIN---Respondent

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- O. IX, r. 8--Dismissal of suit for non-appearance of plaintiffDate fixed not for hearing of suit but for making an order for future progress of case-Order of trial Court dismissing suit for non-appearance of plaintiff on such date-Held, void ab initto, without jurisdiction and a nullity in eye of law. Mst. Ghulam Sakina and 6 others v. Karim Bakhsh and 7 others P L D 1970 Lab. 412 ; Mst. Barkat BIN and others v. Fateh Ali and others P L D 1949 Lab. 432 ; Rahim Bakhsh and others v. Gul Muhammad and 2 others P D 1971 Lab. 746 and Muhammad Siddijue v. Qaim Ali Khan 1980 C L C 1261 ref. JUDGMENT The petitioner, Allah Ditta, filed a suit against the respondent, Aziz Din, for possession of certain property through pre-emption. In that suit, the Civil Judge, Ferozewala, District Sheikhupura, made an interlocutory order relating to the deposit of ear-e-panjam which, was challenged by the respondent by means of an appeal before the District Judge, Sheikhupura. The appeal was dismissed by the learned District Judge on 3rd May, 19J3. Thereafter, the suit came up before the learned Civil Judge on 19th July, 1973, when learned counsel for the plaintiff (petitioner) was present but the defendant (respondent) or his counsel was not in attendance. It was, therefore, directed by the learned trial Court that notice pairvi (notice for pursuing the matter) shall issue to the defendant and his counsel for 8th September 1973. On 8th September, 1973, the defendant's counsel entered appearance but neither the plaintiff nor his counsel had turned up. The suit was, therefore, dismissed under Order IX, rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff made an application for restoration of the suit but without success. His appeal against the order of the learned trial Court also did not meet with success. He has, therefore, come up in revision to this Court. ' 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that on 8th September, 1973 the suit was not fixed for hearing and, therefore, the order of the learned Civil Judge, dismissing the suit in default was void ab initio. He cited Mst. Ghulam Sakina and 6 others v. Karim Bakhsh and 7 others (P L D…
🔒
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