| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 1202 1998 SLD 1202 1998 CLC 179 |
Sindh High Court
Civil Miscellaneous Application No.2175 of 1991 in Suit No.411 of 1977, decision dated: 25th, April, 1996
RASHEED AHMAD RAZVI, J
Mansoor-ul-Arfin alongwith Miss Sofia Saeed for Plaintiff. Abdul Hafeez Lakho for Defendant
Civil Miscellaneous Application No.2175 of 1991 in Suit No.411 of 1977, decision dated: 25th, April, 1996
RASHEED AHMAD RAZVI, J
Mansoor-ul-Arfin alongwith Miss Sofia Saeed for Plaintiff. Abdul Hafeez Lakho for Defendant
UNITED BANK LIMITED---Plaintiff
VS
Mian TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN --Defendant
Law:
Section:
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---'---O.III, R.4---Appointment of counsel---Duration---Appointment of counsel would remain in force until determined with leave of Court or until party appointing him or counsel died or until all proceedings in regard to his client ended. General Manager, Pakistan Railway v. Messrs Q.M.R. Expert Consultants PLD 1990 SC 800; Kamal Din and others v. Nazir Ahmed 1987 CLC 1208 and Messrs Aziz Flour Mills and 2 others v. The Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan 1990 CLC 1473 rel. Mst. Begum and others v. Mst. Begum Kariiz Fatima Hayat and others 1989 SCMR 883; Messrs Rehman Weaving Factory (Regd.), Bahawalnagar v. Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan PLD 1981 SC 21; Messrs Eastern Steels, Karachi v. National Shipping Corporation 1984 CLC 2778; Mst. Hussain Jan and 8 others v. Muhammad Suleman through Legal Heirs and 16 others PLD 1994 Pesh. 95; Asim Khan v. Muhammad Fazil Khan PLD 1983 SC 387 and Maulvi Abdul Aziz Khan v. Mst. Shah Jahan Begum and 2 others PLD 1971 SC 434 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.IX, R.6 & O.III R.4---Counsel of defendant informing Court that he was withdrawing from case and that party be informed to make arrangements for defence of its case---Court passing no order on such intimation and passing ex parte ---Validity---Circumstances culminating into decree would indicate that Court had acted in haste in passing ex parte without affording reasonable opportunity to counsel and defendant to produce evidence---Such ex parte resulted due to non-passing of any order by Court on application made by counsel of defendant, which in turn caused serious injustice, hardship and inconvenience to defendant---Court set aside ex parte decree/ in view of fact that no party should suffer because of mistake of Court. Namdar Khan v. Muhammad Akram Khan 1993 SCMR 434 rel. Mst. Begum and others v. Mst. Begum Kaniz Fatima Hayat and others 1989 SCMR 883; Messrs Rehman Weaving Factory (Regd.), Bahawalnagar v. Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan PLD 1981 SC 21; M/s. Eastern Steels Karachi v. National Shipping Corporation 1984 CLC 2778; Sh. Muhammad Anwar v. Ch. Sultan Muhammad Khan 1974' SCMR 371;…
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