Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.VII,r.11

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.VII,r.11

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------S. 115 & O. VII, R.11---Revision---Limitation---Object and scope---Rejection of plaint---Order passed by Trial Court, rejecting plaint was maintained by Lower Appellate Court and plaintiff preferred civil revision with a delay of 67 days---Effect---Purpose and object of enacting law of limitation for any type of legal proceedings was twofold: firstly to shut doors of litigation on aggrieved party after controversy reached certain stage, though it had remained unsettled and had never been taken to Court of law for decision; secondly to accord finality to decision of Court of law of appropriate jurisdiction, once period for challenging it before higher legal forum had gone by---Such was irrespective of the fact that Court whose decision had attained finality stood at the lowest tier- Finality, which was accorded by law of limitation to controversy or decision of Court-of law, remained irrespective of the fact that aggrieved party was otherwise able to demonstrate that it had valid case on merits---Whole idea behind enacting law of limitation was that let there be end to litigation no matter any party might be unduly benefited on account of application of bar of limitation---Litigant had to first successfully cross hurdle of limitation and only, thereafter merits of case were to be examined by Court of law---If such object of law of limitation was overlooked then the same would amount to ignoring very purpose for which law of limitation was enacted---Whether the order rejecting plaint was sustainable in law on merits, since it had not been nullity or void order, such order upon attaining finality bore legal consequence and would be enforceable on account of failure of plaintiff not to prefer revision within prescribed time---High Court declined to interfere in the orders passed by two Courts below---Revision was dismissed in circumstances. Karachi Development Authority v. Mst. Unsiat Begum 1999 YLR 1160; Mst. Reeta v. Government of Sindh and others 2001 CLC 1825 and Chief Settlement Commissioner, Lahore v. Muhammad Fazil Khan PLD 1975 SC 331 ref. Mehar Khan for Applicant. Muhammad Mustafa Ahmed for Respondents Nos. 1 to…

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