Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2779 2004 SLD 2779 2004 PLD 595
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 1542 of 2001, decided on 31st May, 2004., DATE of hearing: 27th May, 2004.
MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI, J
Muhammad Amin Lakhani for Plaintiff. Aftab Ahmed G. Nabi for Defendants.

MUHAMMAD FAROOQ MARFANI--Plaintiff

VS

ABDUL QADIR TAWAKAL and 7 others ----Defendants

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VIII, R. 10---Failure of defendant to present written statement called for by the Court---Legislature having used word "may" and not "shall" in the provision of O. VIII, R. 10, C.P.C. Court has the discretion to pronounce against the defendant in case he fails to file written statement---Court has to ensure, even when proceeding ex parte, that its decision is in accordance with the facts, which shall be ascertained with as much care as is possible in the absence of any contesting party---Plaintiff can succeed on the strength of his own case and not upon the weakness of the opponent's case. Abdul Ghafoor and others v. M.B.R. and others 1989 MLD 4585; East and West Steamship Co. v. Queensland Insurance Co. PLD 1963 SC 663 and PLD 1958 PC 161 ref. (b) Defamation--- ----Necessary ingredients constituting defamation summarized. The necessary ingredients constituting a defamation can be summarized as under: (a) the allegations levelled against the plaintiff should be false, baseless and unfounded; (b) the wordings used and the allegations levelled, on the face of , it, should have been defamatory and derogatory in nature; (c) such allegations should have been published in widely circulated newspapers or spoken in a large gathering; (d) the said publications made or wordings used should have been with malice without any reasonable excuse and justification; (e) the allegations should have been directly attributed to the -plaintiff by specifically mentioning his name; (c) Defamation--- ----Damages, suit for---Where the plaintiff had ,not been able to substantiate his case for grant of damages on account of his reputation having been damaged in general public by the defendants, suit for damages for defamation would not be sustainable---Principles. None of the ingredients constituting defamation was available in the present case either in the plaint or in the evidence adduced by the plaintiff; (i) it was the case of the plaintiff that the defendants had levelled certain false, baseless and unfounded allegations against the plaintiff, (ii) when there was no allegation alleged to have been levelled, no question of its being…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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