Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2762 2004 SLD 2762 2004 PLD 492
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeal No. 7 of 2004, decided on 27th April, 2004, DATE of hearing: 13th April, 2004.
SARMAD, JALAL OSMANY AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JJ
K.A. Wahab for Appellant. Ashraf Ali Butt for
Respondent No. 1. Nazar Akbar for
Respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 5.

Messrs A.R. BUILDERS (PVT.) LTD.

VS

FAISAL CANTONMENT BOARD and 4 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----- ----O. VI, Rr. 1, 7, O.VII, Rr. 7, 8, O.VIII, Rr. 1, 6 & 7---Plaint or written statement---Final or interim relief, grant of---Essential considerations---Courts are bound in law to confine themselves to reliefs sought and/or which flow from the facts pleaded in plaint---Denial of facts to written statement and pleading additional grounds in written statement would not authorize Court to enlarge scope of suit or relief sought therein by plaintiff---Party is at liberty to file a suit or a counter­claim in a suit in order to obtain a relief---Defendant by mere filing written statement would have no legal right to seek declaration in regard to a fact, which was not subject-matter of suit---Principles. This is an established law that the Courts would not travel outside the scope of suit to grant either final or interim relief of the nature, which has no nexus with the facts pleaded in the plaint and/or relief sought in the suit. The denial of facts in the written statement and pleading additional grounds in written statement would not authorize the Court to enlarge the scope of suit, when plaintiff had not pleaded any such fact nor had sought relief of the nature. The Courts are bound in law to confine themselves to the reliefs sought and/or which flow from the facts pleading in the plaint. A party is at liberty to file a suit and/or a counter-claim of a suit in order to obtain a relief but by merely filing of written statement, the defendant would have no legal right to seek declaration in regard to a fact, which was not subject-matter of the proceedings initiated by the plaintiff. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VII, Rr. 7, 8, O.XIX, R.18 & O.XXXIX, R.7(1) --- Local inspection by Nazir of Court---Validity---Such inspection was not a substitute of evidence---Such inspection and filing of objections thereto by plaintiff would not make order of inspection lawful, if same was outside the scope of suit. JUDGMENT AMIR HANI MUSLIM, J.---This High Court Appeal has been preferred against an order dated 1-12-2003 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in suit No. 1617 of 2001, filed by the appellant…
🔒
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