| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1992 SLG 1965 1992 SLD 1965 1992 PLJ 45 |
High Court (AJ&K)
Civil Revision No.33 of 1991, accepted on 16.2.1992 (approved for reporting on 24.3.1992)
ABDUL MAJEED MALLICK, CJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Revision No.33 of 1991, accepted on 16.2.1992 (approved for reporting on 24.3.1992)
ABDUL MAJEED MALLICK, CJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ELECTRICITY, MIRPUR AND anothers
VS
KASHMIR STEEL MILLS and another--Respondents
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 10(2),6
(i) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- —O.I, R.10(2)—Civil suit—Application for being impleaded as defendant— Whether Superintending Engineer (Electricity) could be allowed to be impleaded as defendant-Question of-Order I, Rule 10(2) of C.P.C. empowers Court to join any person as defendant who ought to have been joined as such for his presence before Court being necessary in order to enable Court to settle and adjudicate upon question involved in suit effectively and completely—Held: Superintending Engineer being a necessary party, was eligible to seek his appearance before Court as defendant by arraying him as such-S.E. directed to move District Judge for impleading him as defendant. [P.50]F (ii) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- —O.IX. R.6~Civil suit-Non-appearance of defendants--£xparte order against-Challenge to-Order of exparte proceedings was recorded by clerk of Court and was signed by Presiding Officer-Application for setting aside exparte order was presented by a junior clerk who was neither party nor authorised agent of petitioners-It was not accompanied by affidavit-Interim orders show that defendants 1 and 3 were still being summoned for appearance and were not served till date of exparte order-Date on which exparte proceedings were ordered, was not date of hearing in suit—Held: Exparte proceedings against defendants 1 and 3 were patently unwarranted and as such illegal. [Pp.47,4850]A,BC PLD 1983 SC (AJK) 223 rel. (iii) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- —O.IX R.6-Civil suit-Non-appearance of defendants-£xpa/te order against- Challenge to-Suit was at stage of filing objections to miscellaneous application and defendants were not asked to file written statement at that stage-Despite exparte proceedings, defendants could join proceedings and present their written statement on next date for progress of suit—Held: Neither District Judge nor counsel for parties cared to appreciate situation of proceedings and unnecessarily indulged into ancillary proceedings resulting in present petition-- Petition acccepted and exparte proceedings set aside. [P.50JDE ORDER The petition is addressed against the order of learned…
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