| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 1783 2000 SLD 1783 2000 CLC 199 |
Peshawar High Court
Regular First Appeal No.9 of 1999, decision dated: 17-09-1999, hearing DATE : 21st June, 1999
TALAT QAYUM QURESHI, J
Haji Ghulam Basit for Appellant. Masoodur Rehman Awan for
Respondent
Regular First Appeal No.9 of 1999, decision dated: 17-09-1999, hearing DATE : 21st June, 1999
TALAT QAYUM QURESHI, J
Haji Ghulam Basit for Appellant. Masoodur Rehman Awan for
Respondent
Raja SAEED AHMAD KHAN
VS
SABIR HUSSAIN
Law:
Section:
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------0. XXXVII, R.3---Suit upon. negotiable instrument---Application for leave to defend suit---Holder of cheque was not bound to prove consideration---Mere denial of consideration by the drawer did not warrant the grant of leave to defend the suit. Hamidullah Khan v. Muhammad Nawaz Qasoori PLD 1982 Lah. 203 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----0. XXXVII, R. 3---Leave to defend suit---Defendant in his application for leave to defend suit had made vague and general averments---Trial Court was justified in holding that the defendant had failed to make out a case for leave to defend the suit. Haji Ali Khan & Co. v. Messrs Allied Bank of Pakistan Ltd. PLD 1995 SC 362 rel. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----0. XXXVII, R.3---Leave to defend suit---Scope---Grant of such leave is not a matter of course or of right---Defendant has to show such fats which may warrant the proving of the consideration by the plaintiff or disclose a plausible defence which may give rise to triable issues---Where no defence worth the name is made out on facts or in law in the application for leave to defend the suit or defence disclosed on affidavits is sham or colourable or illusory/imaginary and may not give rise to triable issues, then leave to defend shall be refused. Messrs Platinum Insurance Company v. Messrs Highways Bridge Contractor International (Pvt.) Ltd. and another 1997 MLD 2394; United Sugar Mills Ltd. v. National Development Finance Corporation and 5 others 1997 MLD 3122; National Bank of Pakistan v. Muhammad Ashraf Sanik and another PLD 1987 Lah. 17 and Haji Ali Khan & Company and 8 others v. Allied Bank of Pakistan, Abbottabad PLD 1995 SC 362 ref. JUDGMENT The respondent/plaintiff, namely, Sabir Hussain filed suit for recovery of Rs.1,50,000 under Order 37 of C.P.C. summonses in the prescribed form, i.e. Form IV Appendix "B" were issued against the appellant/defendant. He not only intentionally avoided the service but also misbehaved with the Court official. His service was, however, affected through S.H.O. on which he came to the Court and filed application for leave to defend the suit wherein he denied toβ¦
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