Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: R-2,O.XXXVII,Rr.2,3

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 5

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--O.XXXVII, Rr. 2 & 3 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5 Suit for recovery of loan Application for leave to appear and defend suit Limitation Application for leave to appear and defend suit was barred by one day and defendant neither had filed any application for condonation of delay nor had claimed exclusion of time Trial Court considered merits of application for leave to appear and defend suit and had justifiably found that defendant had no plausible defence Trial Court had properly and validly dismissed application of defendant for leave to appear and defend suit in absence of any cogent and plausible ground of defence Decree as passed by Trial Court, could not be interfered with in circumstances. Mushtaq Ahmed Qureshi v. The State PLD 1984 Lah. 283 ref. JUDGMENT Respondent Ch. Ahmad Ali upon dishonouring of Cheque No. 919413 dated 3 9 2001 filed a suit on 26 9 2001 for recovery of Rs.24,000 under the provisions of Order XXXVII, Civil Procedure Code against the appellant. 2. It was pleaded in the plaint that appellant borrowed a sum of Rs.24,000 from the respondent plaintiff for a period of 6 months and upon demand, appellant gave the abovesaid cheque for the borrowed amount to the respondent. And that cheque upon presentation to the Bank was dishonoured. Hence the suit. The appellant was served through proclamation in daily "WAFAQ" dated 21 10 2001. The appellant on 1 11 2001 filed an application for leave to appear and defend the suit denying the loan. He, however, admitted issuance of a blank cheque but claimed that the same was issued in favour of the respondent as security for payment of the price of fertilizer purchased by the appellant from Muhammad Latif a relative of the respondent. It was also claimed by the appellant in this application that two receipts for Rs.25,000 and Rs.40,000 and a promissory note were also obtained from the appellant in connection with payment of the price of fertilizer. Appellant also alleged that he has settled the entire fertilizer account in presence, of "Panchayat" and paid the outstanding price thereto on 3 4 2002 but despite payment, respondent did not return the said cheque and the…

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