| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1996 SLG 1358 1996 SLD 1358 1996 PLD 249 |
Lahore High Court
Regular First Appeal No. 104 of 1995, decided on 7th November, 1995
CH. MUHAMMAD NASIM AND TASSADUQ HUSSDIN, JILANI, JJ
Abdul Qadoos Khan Tareen for AppellantPlaintiff.
Regular First Appeal No. 104 of 1995, decided on 7th November, 1995
CH. MUHAMMAD NASIM AND TASSADUQ HUSSDIN, JILANI, JJ
Abdul Qadoos Khan Tareen for AppellantPlaintiff.
MEHDI HASSAN ---Appellant---Plaintiff
VS
AHMED Al ---Respondent---Defendant
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- ---- 0. IX, Rr. 12, 8, 9 & S.96 --- Non-appearance of either plaintiff or his evidence on specified date in spite of direction of Court --- Suit dismissed for non-prosecution under provision of 0, IX, R. 12, C. P. C, ---Decree-shect prepared in the light of the order was not warranted by law ... Order' Of dismissal of suit Impugned in appeal ... Competency ... Only fact that decree-sheet was prepared on basis of impugned order of dismissal of suit was not enough to bring plaintiff's suit within purview of S.96(l), C.P.C.---Where case was dismissed for non prosecution decree-sheet should not be drawn --- Illegal act or working without jurisdiction of Trial Court, would not change texture of substantive or procedural law --- Drawing of decree-sheet in the light of order passed under O.IX, R.12, C.P.C. about dismissal of suit for want of prosecution would not make order in question to be appealable --- Only remedy available to plaintiff was to have proceeded under O.IX, R.9, C.P.C. before Trial Court --- Appeal against order of dismissal of suit being not maintainable was dismissed in circumstances. ORDER CH. MUHAMMAD NASIM, J.---Mehdi Hassan appellant-plaintiff instituted a suit against Ahmad Ali respondent-defendant for the specific performance of agreement of sale said to be reduced into writing on 18-9-1994, whereby the respondent agreed to make sale of the suit property comprising an area of 191 Kanals 5 Marlas of land fully described in the plaint in consideration for an amount of Rs.8,75,787. According to him he had paid the consideration amount to the respondent and transferred the possession of the.suit land to him but was not willing to perform his part of the contract about the registration of the sale-deed or the sanction of the sale mutation and that hence the suit. The suit was resisted by the respondent-defendant who submitted the written statement through Malik TaJ Muhammad TaJ, Advocate on 12-3-1995 who on the same date withdrew himself as well as the written statement and written reply. It is narrated in order dated 27-3-1995 that the respondent-defendant was directed to submit a written statement and the…
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