| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1992 SLG 900 1992 SLD 900 1992 CLC 1459 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No. 518 of 1969, heard on 19th November, 1991
ABDUL MAJID TIWANA, J
C.A. Rehman for Appellant. Muhammad Siddiquc for Muhammad Hassan Choudhry for
Respondent
Regular Second Appeal No. 518 of 1969, heard on 19th November, 1991
ABDUL MAJID TIWANA, J
C.A. Rehman for Appellant. Muhammad Siddiquc for Muhammad Hassan Choudhry for
Respondent
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN (Deceased) through his Legal Heirs
VS
NOOK MUHAMMAD
Law:
Section:
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 19118)--- ----O.VI, R.1---West Pakistan. Land Reforms Regulation, 1959 [MLR 641 para. 25---Pleadings---Practice and procedure---Parties could not go out of their pleadings and set up a different case at a subsequent stage by jumping surprise on each other---If defendant-respondent in Trial Court was of opinion that objection regarding violation of any provision of M.L.R. 64 had a material bearing on suit, he should have taken up that objection in his written statement and if he could not initially mention same therein, he could incorporate it by seeking amendment therefor, but he could not short-circuit whole procedure and abruptly raise that point at the time of arguments. (b) Practice and procedure--- ----Pleadings---Parties could not go out of their pleadings and set up a different case at arguments stage by jumping surprise on each other. Haji Abdullah Khan and others v. Nisar Muhammad Khan and others PLD 1965 SC 690 and Mst. Jannat Bibi v. Sher Muhammad and others 1988 SCMR 1696 ref. JUDGMENT This R.SA. is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 26-7-1969, by which the learned District Judge, Gujranwala, had dismissed the appeal of Muhammad Hussain plaintiff-appellant (who after his death is now represented by his legal representatives) against the judgment and decree, dated 7-6-1968, whereby his suit was dismissed by the learned trial .fudge on account of the sale in question being in violation of Martial Law Regulation No.64. 2. The plaintiff-appellant had brought the suit against the defendant respondent for possession of the disputed land on account of the same having ' been purchased by him from his father Rehmat Ullah. 3. The suit was contested by Noor Muhammad defendant-respondent on various grounds and in view of the pleadings of the parties a number of issues, including issue No.l which is reproduced hereunder, were framed:- `Whether Rehmat Ullah father of the defendant sold the suit property to the plaintiff? OPP. 4. After recording the evidence of the parties, the learned trial Judge at the time of hearing the arguments allowed the learned counsel representing the defendant-respondent to raise an objection…
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