| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1997 SLG 856 1997 SLD 856 1997 CLC 1790 |
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No. 3 of 1997, decision dated: 4-06-1997.(On appeal from the judgment of the High Court dated 30-10-1996 in Civil Revision No.42 of 1995)
BASHARAL AHMAD SHAIKH AND MUHAMMAD YUNUS SURAKHVI, JJ
M. Tabassum Aftab Alvi, Advocate for Appellants. Ghulam Mustafa Mughal, Advocate for
Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3 of 1997, decision dated: 4-06-1997.(On appeal from the judgment of the High Court dated 30-10-1996 in Civil Revision No.42 of 1995)
BASHARAL AHMAD SHAIKH AND MUHAMMAD YUNUS SURAKHVI, JJ
M. Tabassum Aftab Alvi, Advocate for Appellants. Ghulam Mustafa Mughal, Advocate for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD AZAM KHAN and anotheR
VS
MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE KHAN and 3 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)-------S.5---Condonation of delay---Wrong legal advice on an unambiguous legal provision is not a recognised ground for condonation of delay (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.IX, R.8---Cioss-suits---Consolidation---Non-appearance of plaintiffs---Ex parte order---Restoration application---Opportunity given to produce evidence in support of averments made in said application---Personal knowledge of Court--Finding based on---Validity---Finding can be based only on evidence or upon judicial notice---Plea that Black Day was observed in the State does not advance the case for acceptance of restoration application---Cross-suits in spite of their consolidation do not loose their separate existence identity and all duties imposed on plaintiffs by law continue unchanged---Plaintiff in every suit is required by law to be present and the consolidation of suit, which is procedural in nature, does not change this basic requirement---[Messrs Ghulam Farid Muhammad Latif v. The Central Bank of India Limited, Lahore PLD 1954 Lah. 575 dissented from]. Faqir Alam and 10 others v. Ajab Khan and 15 others 1986 CLC 1320 and Muhammad Swaleh and another v. Messrs United Grain & Fodder Agencies PLD 1964 SC 97 distinguished. Messrs Ghulam Farid Muhammad Latif v. The Central Bank of India Limited Lahore PLD 1954 Lah. 575 dissented from. JUDGMENT BASHARAT AHMAD SHAIKH, J.---A civil suit filed by the respondents, Muhammad Siddique and others, was dismissed for default of appearance. Application for restoration was dismissed. Appeal taken to the District Judge also failed. However the High Court has set aside the order mentioned above and the suit of the respondents has been restored on payment of Rs.2,000. Appellants, Muhammad Azam Khan and another, seek reversal of the order passed by the High Court through this appeal which has been filed with leave of the Court. 2. Facts of the case are that two cross-cases between the parties were pending in the Court of Sub-Judge, Bagh. The suits were consolidated and main proceedings were being taken in the suit filed by the present appellants. The evidence of the appellants had already been recorded and…
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