| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1997 SLG 501 1997 SLD 501 1997 PLD 730 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 107 of 1997, heard on 29th July, 1997.
IHSAN-UL-HAQ CHAUDHRY, J
Malik Muhammad Jaffar for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent
Civil Revision No. 107 of 1997, heard on 29th July, 1997.
IHSAN-UL-HAQ CHAUDHRY, J
Malik Muhammad Jaffar for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent
Mst. SARDAR BEGUM
VS
DARWESH MUHAMMAD
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- ----O. X, R.4(2) & S.115---Dismissal of suit for non-appearance of plaintiff in spite of Court's direction to appear and record her statement in answer to defendant's objection that plaint had not been signed by plaintiff herself---Order of dismissal of suit was affirmed by Appellate Court---Validity---Defendants having taken up objection that plaint was not signed by plaintiff, same could have been explained by herself alone---Neither counsel could depose about such fact nor plaintiff's special attorney---Presence of plaintiff was also necessary to obtain her specimen signatures if Court deemed necessary after recording her statement---Such matter, thus, could not proceed in her absence---Plaintiff was under legal obligation to abide by the directions moreso when neither any exemption from appearance was claimed nor there was lawful excuse for avoiding to appear---First Appellate Court noted that although suit was dismissed by Trial Court for non-appearance of plaintiff as directed yet she did not appear even before it to own her signatures on plaint and contended that same was filed by her---Suit had been decided in line with O.X, R.4(2), C.P.C.---Plaintiff had failed to make out case for interference in revisional jurisdiction. Parmarth Gir v. Krishna Dayal Gir and others AIR 1933 All. 517; Sm. Sundar Devi v. Dattarya Narhar Rege and another AIR 1933 All. 551; Mst. Ghulam Fatimah and another v. Mst. Sablan and 7 others 1991 SCMR 2530 and Ghulam Ali and 2 others v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi PLD 1990 SC 1 ref. JUDGMENT The relevant facts for the decision of this civil revision are that the respondent purchased land. The petitioner filed a suit on 7-2-1983 to pre-empt the sale. The suit was resisted amongst others on the ground that the plaint is not signed by the plaintiff and is, bogus, therefore, liable to be dismissed. The trial Court proceeded to seal the plaint, power of attorney and direct the parties to appear in person for recording their better statements in the light of their pleadings. The respondent appeared in person while the petitioner was represented by her counsel and special attorney. The petitioner…
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