| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1976 2008 SLD 1976 2008 PLD 564 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.1407 of 2001, decided on 31st March, 2008., (On appeal from the judgment dated 19-4-2001 in R.S.A. No.162 of 1989 by the Lahore High Court, Lahore).
ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, C.J., IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN AND CH. EJAZ YOUSAF, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No.1407 of 2001, decided on 31st March, 2008., (On appeal from the judgment dated 19-4-2001 in R.S.A. No.162 of 1989 by the Lahore High Court, Lahore).
ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, C.J., IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN AND CH. EJAZ YOUSAF, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Syed MUHAMMAD HASSAN SHAH and others
VS
Mst. BINAT-EFATIMA and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. XLI, R. 27---Appeal, pendency of---Production of additional evidence---Scope---Where taking of additional evidence appeared to a court essential for just decision of case, then power under O.XLI,R. 27, C.P.C. could be exercised, but not otherwise to cater needs of a particular party---Principles. The power available under Order XLI, Rule 27, C.P.C. though cannot be exercised in allowing a party to fill up lacunas or make up deficiency in a case as it has to be exercised cautiously and sparingly yet, where the evidence sought to be produced before the court has a direct bearing on an important issue in the case and the controversy is not likely to be resolved without taking further evidence, the court must take additional evidence in order to render a just decision in the case. Where decision on issue of maintainability of suit was rendered by the trial Court and the rest of the issues remained undecided, a duty is cast upon the Court to collect further evidence so as to decide the case effectively, as rules of procedure are not made for the purpose of hindrance in providing justice. Power available under Order XLI, Rule 27 of C.P.C. is, not meant to cater the needs of a particular party but is available for exercise by the Appellate Court in appropriate cases where need for taking additional evidence appears essential to the Court for just decision of the case. Zar Wali Shah's case 1992 SCMR 1778; Messrs Muhammad Siddiq Muhammad Umar and another v. The Australasia Bank Ltd. PLD 1966 SC 684; Mehr Allah Ditta v. Muhammad Ali PLD 1972 SC 59; Fazal Jan v. Roshan Din PLD 1992 SC 811; Mst. Bakhshi v. Fazal Muhammad 1989 SCMR 2005; Muhammad Yousaf v. Mst. Maqsooda Anjuni 2004 SCMR 1049; Ghulam Muhammad v. Muhammad Aslam PLD 1993 SC 336; Haji Muhammad Zaman v. Zafar Ali Khan and others PLD 1986 SC 88; Mohabbat v. Asadullah Khan and others PLD 1989 SC 112 and Malik Mir Bashi and others v. Haji Allah Khan and others 1999 SCMR 2504 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. XLI, R. 27---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 85---Application for production of additional evidence at first appeal stage---Dismissal of suit…
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