Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 2204 2008 SLD 2204 2008 CLD 981
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.753 of 2003, decision dated: 7-02-2006.
SYED ASGHAR HAIDER, J
Naseem Ullah Khan Niazi for Appellant.

KHAN AMIR

VS

. SARDAR KHAN

Law:

Section:

Tort-------Malicious prosecution---Suit for recovery of damages for malicious prosecution---Defendant whose son was murdered, had right to seek justice---Defendant nominated plaintiff in the F.I.R.; it was up to the plaintiff to prove that said act of defendant had an element of malice---Evidence on record clearly reflected that plaintiff had not been able to prove malice against defendant---Other necessary ingredients which lead to a successful action for grant of damages for malicious prosecution were not fulfilled by the plaintiff as he could not substantiate his assertions with quality evidence---Appellate Court below, in circumstances, had rightly concurred with the findings of the Trial Court, which had dismissed suit filed by the plaintiff--Concurrent findings of the Courts below, could not be interfered with in revisional jurisdiction of High Court, when no jurisdictional error, material illegality or irregularity, misreading and non-reading of evidence had been pointed out. ORDER SYED ASGHAR HAIDER, J.---The petition is directed against the judgment dated 19-11-2002 passed by the Additional District Judge, Khushab, affirming the judgment and decree dated 16-2-2002 passed by the Civil Judge, Khushab, whereby the suit of the plaintiff/petitioner was dismissed. 2. The back-drop of the controversy is that the petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of damages for malicious prosecution contending that the respondent's son Muhammad Aslam was assassinated, he lodged F.I.R. No. 135 dated 16-8-1993, under section 302, P.P.C. Investigation was conducted by the police, the petitioner was discharged aggrieved thereof the respondent filed a private complaint which too was dismissed, the petitioner termed this as malicious prosecution. The suit was contested by the respondent issues were framed, parties were put to trial and thereafter the suit was dismissed. Aggrieved thereof the petitioner filed an appeal which too was dismissed, hence the present petition. 3. Learned counsel contends that evidence has not been properly appraised by both the Courts below, there are material discrepancies in…
🔒
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