Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 1360 2005 SLD 1360 2005 CLC 1422
Peshawar High Court
Writ Petition No.138 of 2002, decision dated: 16-05-2005.
MUHAMMAD QAIM, JAN KHAN AND MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

ALLAH BAKHSH-

VS

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGEI, D.I. KHAN and 2 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------S. 128(2)(f) & O.VIII, Rr.1, 9---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Suit for recovery of balance price of motorcycle---Defendant's plea was that plaintiff had received balance money before due date---Trial Court in compliance with provisions O.XV, C.P.C., framed two issues and adjourned case for plaintiff's evidence---Defendant on adjourned date filed application for amendment of written statement to assert therein that plaintiff had agreed to transfer his land in lieu of price of tractor, but plaintiff was found to be its occupancy tenant and not its owner---Trial Court dismissed such application, which remained intact in revision filed by defendant---Validity---Neither such land of plaintiff had been transferred nor tractor had been delivered, thus, alleged adjustment of balance amount of motorcycle in price of tractor was merely fictitious, frivolous and meaningless---Prayer for amendment was self-negating, unreasonable and frivolous---Defendant had taken 11 months for filing written statement and thereafter by moving such frivolous application had further prolonged matter for five years---Suit had been delayed for almost six years---Such conduct of defendant amounted to gross misuse of process of law---Trial Court should have imposed costs for causing unnecessary delay through such frivolous application---Courts below had exercised jurisdiction legally---High Court dismissed Constitutional petition with costs throughout while directing Trial Court to decide suit within one month after allowing parties to lead evidence on issues already framed. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VIII, R.1---Written statement-Period of thirty days prescribed for filing of written statement---Effect---Written statement must not be accepted beyond thirty days of first hearing---Plaint would be taken as uncontroversial, if written statement was not submitted within thirty days---Where law prescribed a time limit in terms of days, then same could be relaxed for some days only---Term "ordinarily" used in proviso to O.VIII, R.1, C.P.C., though diluted mandatory effect of the term "shall…
🔒
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