| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2593 2004 SLD 2593 2004 PLD 17 |
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 128 of 1981, decided on 30th September, 2003. DATE of hearing: 10th September, 2003
MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI, J
A. Rauf for Plaintiff. Abid S. Zuberi for Defendant No. 1
Suit No. 128 of 1981, decided on 30th September, 2003. DATE of hearing: 10th September, 2003
MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI, J
A. Rauf for Plaintiff. Abid S. Zuberi for Defendant No. 1
ABDUL HAMEED KHAN
VS
Mrs. SAEEDA KHALID KAMAL KHAN and others
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O.VI,R.14,2
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 42
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---- ----O. VI, R. 14---Pleadings---Power of attorney---Authority to sign--Proof---Non-mentioning of authority in plaint signing the same---Plaint was filed through attorney but such fact was not mentioned in the plaint--Power of attorney was only annexed with the plaint but neither the power of attorney was mentioned in the list of documents filed nor it had been shown to be a document relied upon by the plaintiff--Effect---Annexing of the power of attorney alongwith Vakalatnama was not enough to conclude that the signatory was duly authorized to sign and verify the plaint as contemplated udder O.VI, R.14, C.P.C.---To prove the requirement of O.VI, R.14, C.P.C., the plaintiff should have pleaded by clearly stating in the body of plaint that the signatory was duly authorized to sign the plaint---When the same was not pleaded in the plaint, then the signatory of the plaint was not authorized to sign and verify the plaint--Suit was not instituted competently and was dismissed in circumstances. Basdeo v. John Smidt (1899) 22 All. 55 = 1899 AWN 172; Bisheshar Nath v. Emperor (1918) 40 All. 147; Secretary of State v. Dinshano Navrrji and another AIR 1925 Sindh 275; AIR 1925 Lah. 338; Messrs Gulf Air v. Messrs Shakil Air Express (Pvt.) Ltd. PLD 2003 Kar. 156 and Messrs Gotecon Trading Ltd. v. Government of Pakistan and others Suit No.209 of 1995 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----- ----O.VI, R.2---Signing of plaint---Material fact---Signing of plaint by duly authorized person was a material fact as required under O.VI, R.2, C.P.C.---Validity---All facts which though not necessary to establish the cause of action or defence but which the party to pleading was required to prove at trial are also material facts---Signing of plaint by duly authorized person is a "material fact" and the same has to be pleaded in the plaint. PLD 1947 PC 180 rel. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- ----O. VI, Rr. 2 & 14---Institution of suit competently---Proof---Name of attorney mentioned in title of plaint---Failure to state such fact in body of plaint---Effect---Mere, mention of the name of attorney in the title of the plaint is not…
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