Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XXXVII

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XXXVII

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 85

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. XXXVII, Rr.2, 3 & O.XLI, R.27-Suit for recovery of amount on basis of pro note---Application for production of additional evidence---Dismissal of---Trial Court framed issues and both parties produced their respective evidence---Plaintiff thereafter filed application seeking permission to produce three photographs of the parties, in additional evidence pleading that said photographs would show that defendant had received suit amount---Trial Court dismissed the application---Plaintiff had claimed that photographs sought to be produced in additional evidence being public documents could be produced in additional evidence in the interest of justice---Validity---Plaintiff neither mentioned about said photographs in his pleadings nor entered the same in the list of reliance---Unsuccessful party was not to be granted opportunity to fill up weaker parts of its case---Plea of plaintiff that said photographs could not be produced as those were stolen, could not be believed---If same were lost, plaintiff, at least, could have mentioned and relied upon in the list of-reliance and also could get fresh photographs from the negatives---Plaintiff could not demonstrate that photographs in question were part of public record---Could not be conceived that private photographs could be considered as a part of public record---Application filed by plaintiff for production of additional evidence, was rightly dismissed by the Trial Court in circumstances. Iqbal Ahmad and others N. Khurshid Ahmad and others 1987 SCMR 744; Sher Baz Khan and others v. Mst. Malkani Sahibzadi Tiwana PLD 2003 SC 849; Muhammad Yousaf v. Mst. Maqsooda Anjum 2004 SCMR 1049 and Shtamand and others v. Zahir Shah and others 2005 SCMR 348 rel. Mian Anwar Mubeen Ansari for Petitioner. ORDER MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J.--- Fact of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.6,50,000 against the respondent/defendant, before the learned District Judge under the summary procedure provided under Order XXXVII, C.P.C. on the basis of pro note and receipt both dated 19-4-2002, which was resisted by the respondent, who filed the written…

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