Law:

Section:

(i) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)- ----O.XVII, Rr. 2 & 3 & O.IX, R. 8--Contentions--On fateful date trial Court instead of closing the evidence of the appellant by proceeding in terms of O. XVII R. 3 C.P.C. should have proceeded to dismiss the suit of appellant as required by O. XVII R. 2 read with O. IX R. 8 C.P.C. as neither the appellant nor his counsel was present. 2004 MLD 1242 (Lahore) (DB) and 2004 MLD 1204 rel. (ii) Stamp Act, 1899 (II of 1899)- ----S. 2(22)--Prove of--Pronote even executed as security is to be considered as with consideration unless proved otherwise--Case remanded to trial Court for deciding afresh after granting one opportunity to the plaintiff. Judgment Muhammad Jehangir Arshad, J.--This R.F.A. is directed against the judgement dated 26.2.2004 passed by learned Addl: District Judge Karor District, Layyah dismissing appellant's suit for the recovery of Rs. 8,10,000/- filed by him under Order XXXVII CPC on the basis of pronote dated 31.8.2002. 2. The facts in brief are that Muhammad Waris appellant filed suit before the learned Addl: District Judge in summary jurisdiction under Order XXXVII CPC for the recovery of Rs. 8,10,000/- on the basis of a pronote and receipt allegedly executed by respondent on 31.8.2002. The suit was filed on 24.4.2003 and the learned Addl: District Judge on 24.4.2003 directed issuance of summon to the respondent. The respondent ultimately entered appearance before the learned trial Court on 24.5.2003 and at his request the case was adjourned to 31.5.2003 on which date, application for leave to appear and defend the suit was moved and the learned trial Court vide order dated 22.10.2003 granted the respondent leave to appear and defend the suit subject to furnishing surety bond of the disputed amount and adjourned the matter to 29.10.2003 for the purposes of furnishing surety bond as well as filing of written statement by the respondent. As on 29.10.2003 surety bond was furnished and written statement filed, therefore, the learned trial Court framed the following issues on 3.10.2003 and put the parties at trial:-- ISSUES: 1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recovery of Rs. 8,10,000/- on the…

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