Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 1

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--O. XXXVII, Rr. 1 & 2---Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881), S. 4---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts.17 & 79---Recovery of money---Promissory note---Non-attestation of two witnesses---Suit for recovery of money on the basis of promissory note was dismissed by Trial Court for the reason that two witnesses were not produced to prove the note---Validity--Promissory note being a promise by its maker for payment of amount received under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, if same required certain attestation, the instrument i.e. promissory note would become a bond---Promissory note required no attestation of witnesses and was neither covered by Art.17 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, which was a general law, nor non-production of at least two witnesses to prove the execution of pro note was fatal for making the same admissible in evidence---Trial Court was not right in excluding disputed pro note from consideration either for want of attesting witnesses in terms of Art.17 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, or for non-production of two witnesses for its proof as required by Art-79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984-- Judgment and decree passed by Trial Court was set aside and case was remanded to Trial Court for decision afresh---Appeal was allowed in circumstances. Zaheer-ud-Din Sheikh v. Shatab Khan Nasim NLR 1994 AC 661 rel. Muhammad Nawaz v. Abdul Sattar PLD 2000 Lah. 1619; Maqsood Ahmad and others v. Salman Ali PLD 2003 SC 31 and Abdul Khaliq v. Muhammad Asghar Khan and 2 others PLD 1996 Lah. 367 distinguished. (b) Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)- ----S.4---Stamp Act (II of 1899), S.2(5)---'Promissory note" and "bond"---Distinction---Bond is a promise made by its maker but to be attested by witnesses, whereas, according to Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, promissory note is also a promise by its maker, yet does not require to be attested by witnesses. Mst. Sughran Begum and 11 others v. Haji Mir Qadir Bakhsh and 2 others PLD 1986 Quetta 232 rel. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---O.XX, R.5---Judgment---Evidence, non-discussing of---Trial Court, while recording its findings on merits of the case, did not fully…

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