Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 2704 2008 SLD 2704 2008 PLD 239
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeals Nos. 204, 205, 206 and 207 of 2007, decided on 6th February, 2008
SYED MEHMOOD ALAM RIZVI AND FARRUKH ZIA G. SHAIKH, JJ
Mansoor-ul-Arfin for Appellant. Rasheed A. Rizvi for
Respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

KHAWAJA FEROZ

VS

MUHAMMAD DAWOOD and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXVI, R. 1---Local Commission---Recording of evidence---Scope---High Court, on plaintiff's application appointed Local Commission for recording of evidence of parties---Plea raised by defendant was that evidence could not be recorded through Local Commission just for saving time---Validity---Taking steps for early decision in the matter and recording evidence on commission to save time of the parties could not be termed to be erroneous or an act against principles of natural justice---High Court rightly held that it would be in the interest of both the parties if they came out of litigation as early as possible---Order of appointment of Local Commission was not likely to cause any prejudce to defendant in any way, as both the parties would have the opportunity to adduce their evidence and cross-examine the witnesses---High Court in High Court appeal declined to interfere with the order passed by High Court---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Khatiza Bai v. Muslim Commercial Bank PLD 1978 SC 96; Malik Asad Ali and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 1998 SC 161; Mrs. Shahnaz and others v. Hamid Ali Mirza 2006 CLC 1736 and unreported case of Allied Bank of Pakistan v. Imdad A. Shaikh (HCA No.216 of 2007) ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXVI, R.1---Local Commission---Recording of evidence--Demeanor of witness---Scope---Recording of evidence through Local Commission was assailed on the ground that court might check demeanor and stop irrelevant questions likely to be put to witness---Validity---Such conditions were available in all the suits where recording of evidence on Commission had been ordered---If such had been a valid reasons, then appointment of Local Commissioner for evidence would have been discouraged in all cases. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXVI, R.1---Local Commission---Recording of evidence---Consent of parties---Effect---Order for recording of evidence by Local Commission can be passed through consent of parties but there is no bar on the Court passing the order without consent---Even in cases where parties give consent, the Court is not bound to…
🔒
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