Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VII, R.2---Suit for recovery of amount---Plaintiff was a firm carrying a business of contractors, engineers and builders and an agreement was arrived at between plaintiff firm and defendant for construction of two storeyed house of defendant which work along with additional work was completed by plaintiff---Defendant paid certain amount to plaintiff, but balance amount having not been paid by defendant, plaintiff filed suit for its recovery---Said suit having concurrently been decreed by the Trial Court and Appellate Court, defendant had filed revision against the same---Defendant did not deny execution of agreement between the parties---Defendant, in the written statement, did not deny details of work undertaken by the plaintiff as given in the plaint---Plaintiff's offer was accepted by defendant---Nothing was on record showing that work was not done by plaintiff in accordance with the specification and terms and conditions of the agreement---No defect was ever found or pointed out in the work completed/undertaken by the plaintiff---Plaintiff undertook extra work as per desire of defendant for which extra rate was claimed by plaintiff---Concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Courts below did not suffer from any illegality, misreading or non-reading of evidence and no material irregularity had been pointed out---Plaintiff had fully proved his case through his oral assertion as well as through documentary evidence, which had established that defendant had not paid disputed amount to plaintiff---Defendant had failed to make out any case for interference by the High Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. JUDGMENT M. JAVED BUTTAR, J.--- This revision petition, under section 115, C.P.C., is directed against the judgment and decree dated 20-10-1998 passed by Additional District Judge, Lahore, whereby the petitioner's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 10-12-1997 passed by the Civil Judge 1st Class, Lahore, decreeing the respondent's recovery suit against the petitioner, was dismissed with costs. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The respondent despite having been served upon…

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