2016 CLC 1197
In a situation where two or more Courts have jurisdiction to try a suit........... ....under the Code of Civil Procedure, the parties can select a particular Court having territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction for the determination of their dispute and there does not appear
anything wrong or illegal in it or opposed to public policy.
2016 MLD 337
The mother was not the natural guardian of the minor children....... .........The judgment and decree for dismissal of a suit for Specific Performance of Contract has been maintained while observing that the mother was not the natural guardian of the minor children, who could not execute any transaction/ agreement to sell on their behalf without permission of the court.........
2015 YLR 1332,,,, NLR 2015 Civil 446
Date for submission of written statement is not a date of hearing......On the date fixed for filing written statement the ex parte proceedings could not be conducted against the defendant...... ..
2015 YLR 1332, NLR 2015 Civil 446 (Ref. PLD 2002 SC 84)
DELAY OF 9/10 DAYS IN FILING APPEAL IS NOT FATAL
"As such the delay of 9/10 days in filing of the appeal cannot be held fatal to non-suit the petitioners as the order impugned therein is found to have been passed without jurisdiction and in an illegal manner, and merely on technicality such order cannot be allowed to remain in the field by the court of law. As such, after condoning the delay it is held that the appeal was duly instituted."
2017 LHC 932
QARZ E HASNA
Term Qarz-e-Hasna does not connote to a loan, which is given by a person to another person in this world, rather it signifies whatever is given to another for selflessly and absolutely pure motives with the belief that he shall get the reward in the next world......
2016 LHC 4378
A notification shall only be called notification if it is published in official Gazette under proper authority and not otherwise...... ....
2017 LHC 1069
ONLY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TO PLEAD THE CASE
The state case it is the duty of public prosecutor to plead case and even if the private counsel is engaged by the complainant side, he has to assist the public prosecutor.
2007 SCMR 554
Manner of exercising power, if violative of law would be termed as mala fide. Civil court has jurisdiction to take cognizance of such matter......... ...
2017 CLC 119
LOCAL COMMISSION REPORT - ORDER XXVI, RULE 9, 10 CPC 1908
Local commission report........ Scope.......... . Summoning of local commission by application as court witness........ ..
i. Only court had power on its own motion to summon a person to give evidence at any stage of the proceedings if it was necessary to examine such person...... ii. Provisions of O. XVI R. 14 could not be used by a party to a litigation to summon a person...... iii. Report of local commission was prior to framing of issues..... had the party given the name of the local commission in list of witnesses then he could have summoned through process of the court...... iv. Party cannot insist the court to exercise its power under Order XVI R. 14 to call the local commission as witness.......v . Report of local commission together with evidence would be evidence in the case........ Such evidence or report ought to be considered as evidence in coming to conclusion, but not binding on court.......vi. No party had filed objections under Order XXVI R. 10(2), the court should treat the report as evidence under XXVI R.10 (2)......
2017 CLC 70
Execution of An Agreement. Requirement.... ...Parties and witness though should execute document at the end, but parties must also sign each page if document written out more than one page......
2017 CLC NOTE 7, 7
Document duty roaster was produced in the statement of the counsel of the plaintiff...... .Validity.....B oth the courts below had relied upon a document i.e. the duty roaster of the department which was not produced by the plaintiff while appearing in witness box.......duty roaster was placed on record by the plaintiff was not a public document....... Such document wasn't produced by the scribe or the signatory of the same or by the official of the department while appearing in the court........Su ch type of document cannot be relied by the courts until proved according to law........
2017 CLC 466
RES-JUDICATA IN ARBITRATION
Principle of res judicata is applicable to arbitration proceedings.... parties should not be permitted to raise disputes over and over again....once disputes have been settled either by a pronouncement of court of competent jurisdiction or by an award of an arbitrator..... .
PLD 2011 LAH 258
XVII-3 CPC
1. "where an adjournment simplicitor is sought and is also not opposed by the other side and the case is posted for a next date, time has not been allowed for any particular act but an
adjournment in routine has been granted, therefore, such a simple adjournment with no specific act to be done on the next date will not be time allowed or time granted for the purposes of Order XVII Rule 3 of CPC."
2. "However, if the adjournment is granted with a particular direction specifying the act to be done on the next date of hearing, even it is not opposed by the opposite counsel, the party is bound to do the said act and default in doing so will attract the provisions of Order XVII Rule 3 of CPC." Ref. (PLD 1971 S.C. 434)
"where “mere adjournment” is requested and not opposed by the other side, such an adjournment will also not attract Order XVII Rule 3 of CPC. This is because no specific act is to be done by the party to the suit seeking the adjournment and cannot be said to affect the progress of the suit. However, if an adjournment has been granted on the specific request of the party to do a particular act or if a direction of the court has been given to do a particular act on the next date of hearing, absence of objection from the other party is immaterial. Reliance. (1983 SCMR 619). "
"It would be odd to imagine that series of adjournments can be granted just because the party from the other side does not raise any objection. Like this role of the court is reduced to that of a bystander. This would stultify adjudication of cases and make a mockery of Order XVII rule 3 CPC. This cannot be the intent of the law"
2017 LHC 311
Subsection (1) of section 115 CPC absolves the petitioner from filing certified copies of said documents ---......Second proviso to section 115 (1) CPC makes it obligatory for the subordinate Court to provide a copy of the impugned decision within three days thereof; and, in case of failure of the subordinate Court to provide copy the party would be entitled to get condonation of delay in filing revision petition......
2017 LHC 381
Where there is non-compliance of Section 16(2) of the Punjab Environmental Protection Act, 1997, Section 16(3) enables the Environment Protection Agency to, itself take the measures that are prescribed in the Environmental Protection Order......
2017 LHC 481
Parking at Public & Private places only can be regularized by City District Government..... "Therefore any place where the public will have a right of access on a regular and continuous basis falls within the meaning of public place. Hence parking in public places falls within the scope of the City District Government and LPC. Furthermore, a private parking stand operating
in a public place is bound to collect parking rates notified by the City District Government and will be regulated by the LPC because they control and monitor parking in public places."
2016 CLC 1417
The Consumer Court has no jurisdiction in criminal cases and detection bill issued by WAPDA.
2015 MLD 247
The effect of copying evidence of one case in other case in verbatim has been defined and the same has not been found fatal as the sets of witnesses in both the cases were the same and the party calling in question the same before the third forum failed to point out that as to what prejudice was caused by the said action.....
2014 LHC 3990
It is a settled principal of law that non-appearance of the plaintiff in affirmative evidence and reserving his right before the learned trial court till recording of his rebuttal evidence is violative of Order XVII Rules 1 & 3 CPC.......
2014 LHC 7506
The compromise is complete when the same is accepted by the court and in case of resiling by one party, the document of compromise can be called agreement of compromise..... ....
2016 YLR 1147,,,,,,,,,20 16 CLC 1085
The powers of Executing Court defined where the property situates outside its territorial jurisdiction and what procedure should be adopted......
2016 YLR 110
Mere admission of affixation of signatures/ thumb impressions on a document is not sufficient proof regarding its valid execution. The burden lies on the beneficiary to prove valid execution of the document, if the same is denied by the executant......
2014 LHC 7584
non-deposit of zar-e-soim within the stipulated period as required by section 24 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1994 would result in dismissal of the suit for possession through pre-emption. The writ petition was dismissed......
2015 CLC 657
Even otherwise, the sale deed was found to be produce of fraud and new entry in the revenue record on the basis thereof gives new cause of action. As such suit was declared to be within time......
2015 CLC 657
Slip of tongue in Evidence
A party cannot be penalized due to slip of tongue of a fact as the statement of a witness cannot be read in isolation, but an accumulative effect thereof has to be taken into consideration.. ..
2016 CLC 1258
Oral contract and its ingredients.... .
PLJ 2016 Lah 26
A promissory note even if was attested by two witnesses, the same remains within the definition of pro-note and a recovery suit on the basis of negotiable instrument is triable by the District Court under Order XXXVII rules 1 & 2 of the Civil Procedure Code of 1908.......
NLR 2014 CIVIL 54
Dismissal of suit & court fee...
Where the Court records findings on all issues and while dismissing the suit on merits requires the deficit Court fee should be by the plaintiff, the procedure is not justified......
PLJ 2014 Lah. 118
Limitation & Office objection
Once a suit, appeal or revision has been presented before the authorized officer of the Court within prescribed period of limitation, it cannot be treated time barred for the reason that the office has noted defects in the proceedings which have not been removed by the concerned party or his Advocate....... .(In this caes the appellant after the 8 month re submitted the case for filling although the office gave time of 3 days for removal of objection )
Lack of jurisdiction: Remedies against null and void decrees and orders (Indian Jurisdiction)
As a general principle if a court has got no jurisdiction to try and decide a suit, it cannot be conferred jurisdiction by consent, either express or implied (e.g. by absence of objection at appropriate time). A decree without jurisdiction is nullity and may be questioned at any stage including execution or even in collateral proceedings
Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan, AIR 1954 SC 340 (Followed in Foreshore Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. Praveen D. Desai (Dead) AIR 2015 SC 2006).
“ ......it is a fundamental principle well established that a decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is a nullity and that its invalidity could be set up whenever and wherever it is sought to be enforced or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction, whether it is pecuniary or territorial or whether, it is in respect of the subject – matter of action, strikes at the very authority of the court to pass any decree, and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of parties?.
Lack of pecuniary jurisdiction is an exception to the general principle in view of section 11 of Court Fees Act and a decree suffering from such defect is not to be treated as, what it would be but for the section, null and void‘. Same exception will apply to lack of territorial jurisdiction in view of section 21 C.P.C.
In Chief Engineer Hydel Project v. Ravinder Nath, AIR 2008 SC 1315 order of termination of service of a workman was set aside in a suit which decree was affirmed in First Appeal by ADJ and in Second Appeal by High Court. First time argued before the Supreme Court in SLP that civil court had no jurisdiction to decide the dispute and only labour Court had the jurisdiction with respect thereto. The Supreme Court permitted the argument to be raised and accepted the same.
Para 19 “.... Once the original decree itself has been held to be without jurisdiction and hit by the doctrine of coram non judice, there would be no question of upholding the same merely on the ground that the objection to the jurisdiction was not taken at the initial, First Appellate or the Second Appellate stage. ....”
In Hasham Abbas Sayyad v. Usman Abbas Sayyad AIR 2007 SC 1077 after passing of preliminary decree in a partition suit an application for sale of the property in dispute was filed whereupon the property was sold through auction. Neither final decree had been passed nor even proceedings for the same had been initiated. The Supreme Court held that the sale was nullity as it could take place only in execution of final decree which had not even been passed and that the final decree if passed would have been appealable.
“ 21. The core question is as to whether an order passed by a person lacking inherent jurisdiction would be a nullity. It will be so. The principles of estoppel, waiver and acquiescence or even resjudicata which are procedural in nature would have no application in a case where an order has been passed by the Tribunal/ Court which has no authority in that behalf. Any order passed by a court without jurisdiction would be coram non judice being a nullity, the same ordinarily should not be given effect to.
Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh and another v. L.V.A. Dikshitulu and others, AIR 1979 SC 193
M.D. Army Welfare Housing Organization v. Sumangal Services (P) Ltd. (2004) 8 SCC 619 HCL Modi v. DLF Universal AIR 2005 SC 4446 Ramesh Chand Ardawatiya v. Anil Panjwani, AIR 2003 SC 2508
“ 19. ….Where there is a special tribunal conferred with jurisdiction or exclusive jurisdiction to try a particular class of cases even then the civil court can entertain a civil suit of that class on availability of a few grounds. An exclusion of jurisdiction of the civil court is not to be readily inferred. (See Dhulabhai v. State of M.P, (1968) 3 SCR 662) An objection as to the exclusion of the civil court‘s jurisdiction for availability of alternative forum should be taken before the trial court and at the earliest, failing which the higher court may refuse to entertain the plea in the absence of proof of prejudice..."
(2013 PLC (C.S.) 492)
Giving discretion for grant of two additional marks to Selection/ Recruitment Committee at its own level through a corrigendum would promote misuse of discretion which could result in nepotism, corruption, feeling of despondency and hatred against the State and was detrimental and discriminatory to candidates who expected to be treated on merit. The court further observed that: Selection/ Recruitment Committee is expected to exercise discretion judiciously, honestly, objectively and in accordance with law.
2004 PLD 21 LAHORE-HIGH-COU RT-LAHORE
---O. XIX, R.3---Affidavit ---Admissibilit y---Procedure-- -Filing of counter-affidav it---Effect---A ffidavit, ipso facto is not admissible in evidence and its contents cannot be accepted Ipsi dixit without cross examination of deponent---Imma terial whether a counter-affidav it is filed by opposite side or not---Duty of Court is to call for record, direct cross examination of deponent and take evidence to form opinion........ .............
2016 MLD 1761
When plaintiff challenges registered sale deed or power of attorney on his behalf, suit for cancellation of document competent.
2016 MLD 1400
There should be some good cause or reason for filing list of witnesses after prescribed period of seven days of framing of issues. Mere desire of a party to do an act, which was required to be done in a particular manner, cannot be considered to be a good cause.......... ....
2016 MLD 438
It is settled law that omission to prescribe a procedure should not be taken as prohibition. PLD 1969 SC 65 relied upon.
2014 LHC 5682 2016 MLD 67
If someone does not want to become a witness or give evidence, there is no provision of law under which the court could compel him to necessarily give his testimony.
2014 LHC 3160 2016 MLD 337
The mother was not the natural guardian of the minor children, who could not execute any transaction/ agreement to sell on their behalf without permission of the court. Even otherwise unilateral agreement was not enforceable.
2014 LHC 3066 2016 MLD 1271
The effect of recording the evidence by the Reader of the Court instead of the Presiding Officer has been discussed and in the absence of any objection at the relevant time or showing as to what prejudice has been caused, no exception can be thereto.
2016 MLD 323, 2016 AC 362
Scribe of a document can only be a competent witness in terms of Articles 17 and 79 of the Qanun-e-Shahada t Order, 1984; if he has fixed his signatures as an attesting witness of the document.
2017 CLC 70 (Lahore )
Article 79..... " Attesting Witness "
Meaning, Attesting Witness was person who in presence of executant puts his signature or mark on it after he had seen executant or someone by executant's direction sign or affix his mark to it or after he had received from executant of personal Acknowledgement of his signature or mark or his signature or mark of such other person..
PLD 2007 Quetta 1
Ref. PLD 1985 SC 153
Waiver of Limitation.....
Limitation being a matter of statue and provisions being mandatory, it couldn't be waived and even if waived, it could be taken up by party waiving it and by Courts themselves..... ...
2014 CLC 87
Husband may file suit in family court for receiving Gifts and other........no t in civil court....
2004 CLC 1
Mere appendage of thumb impression of donor on the gift deed by itself without independent proof of factum of gift in favour of donee wouldn't be sufficient to establish that property had validly been gifted by donor to donee out of his free will......
Citation Name : 2000 CLC 71 LAHORE-HIGH-COU RT-LAHORE
Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD BOOTA
Side Opponent : BASHIR AHMAD
Code of Civil Procedure 1908 Ss. 9 & 115---Suit for damages and mesne profits ---Maintainabil ity--Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of---Plaintiff/ respondent had purchased land in dispute, but defendant/ petitioner not only refused to deliver possession of disputed land to plaintiff/ respondent, but also refused to give share of produce to him---Plaintiff /respondent filed suit for damages and mesne profits which was resisted by defendant/ petitioner contending that Civil court had no jurisdiction in the matter as same fell exclusively within jurisdiction of revenue Authorities---C ontention of defendant/ petitioner was repelled because the same was not only not raised before courts below, but it was also not pleaded that the defendant/ petitioner was a tenant under plaintiff/ respondent---Sui t for mesne profits and damages for use and occupation of land in dispute filed by plaintiff/ respondent was rightly found to be maintainable before Civil court, concurrently by courts below---Finding s of courts below based on facts and evidence on record, could not be interfered with by High court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.514 OF 2008
(Against the judgment dated 25.3.2008 of the Lahore High Court,
Only inter se parties of the suit are bound from the result of suit.....
"As far as the effect of the consent decree dated 10.6.1979 is concerned, suffice it to say that such decree in terms of Section 43 of the Specific Relief Act would only be binding inter se the parties i.e. the respondent and his father and would have no legal significance to affect and prejudice the rights of a third person. In the above context, the judgment reported as Muhammad Iqbal and others Vs. Khair Din through L.Rs. and others (2014 SCMR 33) is of relevance."
CIVIL APPEAL NO.514 OF 2008 (Against the judgment dated 25.3.2008 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No.9530/1998)
once a property is treated to be an evacuee property even erroneously, then the same cannot be held to be otherwise and the Civil Court in this behalf would have no jurisdiction,.. ....."
Muhammad Din and 8 others Vs. Province of the Punjab through Collector and others (PLD 2003 Lah. 441)2016 CLC 1197
In a situation where two or more Courts have jurisdiction to try a suit........... ....under the Code of Civil Procedure, the parties can select a particular Court having territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction for the determination of their dispute and there does not appear
anything wrong or illegal in it or opposed to public policy.
2016 MLD 337
The mother was not the natural guardian of the minor children....... .........The judgment and decree for dismissal of a suit for Specific Performance of Contract has been maintained while observing that the mother was not the natural guardian of the minor children, who could not execute any transaction/ agreement to sell on their behalf without permission of the court.........
2015 YLR 1332,,,, NLR 2015 Civil 446
Date for submission of written statement is not a date of hearing......On the date fixed for filing written statement the ex parte proceedings could not be conducted against the defendant...... ..
2015 YLR 1332, NLR 2015 Civil 446 (Ref. PLD 2002 SC 84)
DELAY OF 9/10 DAYS IN FILING APPEAL IS NOT FATAL
"As such the delay of 9/10 days in filing of the appeal cannot be held fatal to non-suit the petitioners as the order impugned therein is found to have been passed without jurisdiction and in an illegal manner, and merely on technicality such order cannot be allowed to remain in the field by the court of law. As such, after condoning the delay it is held that the appeal was duly instituted."
2017 LHC 932
QARZ E HASNA
Term Qarz-e-Hasna does not connote to a loan, which is given by a person to another person in this world, rather it signifies whatever is given to another for selflessly and absolutely pure motives with the belief that he shall get the reward in the next world......
2016 LHC 4378
A notification shall only be called notification if it is published in official Gazette under proper authority and not otherwise...... ....
2017 LHC 1069
ONLY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TO PLEAD THE CASE
The state case it is the duty of public prosecutor to plead case and even if the private counsel is engaged by the complainant side, he has to assist the public prosecutor.
2007 SCMR 554
Manner of exercising power, if violative of law would be termed as mala fide. Civil court has jurisdiction to take cognizance of such matter......... ...
2017 CLC 119
LOCAL COMMISSION REPORT - ORDER XXVI, RULE 9, 10 CPC 1908
Local commission report........ Scope.......... . Summoning of local commission by application as court witness........ ..
i. Only court had power on its own motion to summon a person to give evidence at any stage of the proceedings if it was necessary to examine such person...... ii. Provisions of O. XVI R. 14 could not be used by a party to a litigation to summon a person...... iii. Report of local commission was prior to framing of issues..... had the party given the name of the local commission in list of witnesses then he could have summoned through process of the court...... iv. Party cannot insist the court to exercise its power under Order XVI R. 14 to call the local commission as witness.......v . Report of local commission together with evidence would be evidence in the case........ Such evidence or report ought to be considered as evidence in coming to conclusion, but not binding on court.......vi. No party had filed objections under Order XXVI R. 10(2), the court should treat the report as evidence under XXVI R.10 (2)......
2017 CLC 70
Execution of An Agreement. Requirement.... ...Parties and witness though should execute document at the end, but parties must also sign each page if document written out more than one page......
2017 CLC NOTE 7, 7
Document duty roaster was produced in the statement of the counsel of the plaintiff...... .Validity.....B oth the courts below had relied upon a document i.e. the duty roaster of the department which was not produced by the plaintiff while appearing in witness box.......duty roaster was placed on record by the plaintiff was not a public document....... Such document wasn't produced by the scribe or the signatory of the same or by the official of the department while appearing in the court........Su ch type of document cannot be relied by the courts until proved according to law........
2017 CLC 466
RES-JUDICATA IN ARBITRATION
Principle of res judicata is applicable to arbitration proceedings.... parties should not be permitted to raise disputes over and over again....once disputes have been settled either by a pronouncement of court of competent jurisdiction or by an award of an arbitrator..... .
PLD 2011 LAH 258
XVII-3 CPC
1. "where an adjournment simplicitor is sought and is also not opposed by the other side and the case is posted for a next date, time has not been allowed for any particular act but an
adjournment in routine has been granted, therefore, such a simple adjournment with no specific act to be done on the next date will not be time allowed or time granted for the purposes of Order XVII Rule 3 of CPC."
2. "However, if the adjournment is granted with a particular direction specifying the act to be done on the next date of hearing, even it is not opposed by the opposite counsel, the party is bound to do the said act and default in doing so will attract the provisions of Order XVII Rule 3 of CPC." Ref. (PLD 1971 S.C. 434)
"where “mere adjournment” is requested and not opposed by the other side, such an adjournment will also not attract Order XVII Rule 3 of CPC. This is because no specific act is to be done by the party to the suit seeking the adjournment and cannot be said to affect the progress of the suit. However, if an adjournment has been granted on the specific request of the party to do a particular act or if a direction of the court has been given to do a particular act on the next date of hearing, absence of objection from the other party is immaterial. Reliance. (1983 SCMR 619). "
"It would be odd to imagine that series of adjournments can be granted just because the party from the other side does not raise any objection. Like this role of the court is reduced to that of a bystander. This would stultify adjudication of cases and make a mockery of Order XVII rule 3 CPC. This cannot be the intent of the law"
2017 LHC 311
Subsection (1) of section 115 CPC absolves the petitioner from filing certified copies of said documents ---......Second proviso to section 115 (1) CPC makes it obligatory for the subordinate Court to provide a copy of the impugned decision within three days thereof; and, in case of failure of the subordinate Court to provide copy the party would be entitled to get condonation of delay in filing revision petition......
2017 LHC 381
Where there is non-compliance of Section 16(2) of the Punjab Environmental Protection Act, 1997, Section 16(3) enables the Environment Protection Agency to, itself take the measures that are prescribed in the Environmental Protection Order......
2017 LHC 481
Parking at Public & Private places only can be regularized by City District Government..... "Therefore any place where the public will have a right of access on a regular and continuous basis falls within the meaning of public place. Hence parking in public places falls within the scope of the City District Government and LPC. Furthermore, a private parking stand operating
in a public place is bound to collect parking rates notified by the City District Government and will be regulated by the LPC because they control and monitor parking in public places."
2016 CLC 1417
The Consumer Court has no jurisdiction in criminal cases and detection bill issued by WAPDA.
2015 MLD 247
The effect of copying evidence of one case in other case in verbatim has been defined and the same has not been found fatal as the sets of witnesses in both the cases were the same and the party calling in question the same before the third forum failed to point out that as to what prejudice was caused by the said action.....
2014 LHC 3990
It is a settled principal of law that non-appearance of the plaintiff in affirmative evidence and reserving his right before the learned trial court till recording of his rebuttal evidence is violative of Order XVII Rules 1 & 3 CPC.......
2014 LHC 7506
The compromise is complete when the same is accepted by the court and in case of resiling by one party, the document of compromise can be called agreement of compromise..... ....
2016 YLR 1147,,,,,,,,,20 16 CLC 1085
The powers of Executing Court defined where the property situates outside its territorial jurisdiction and what procedure should be adopted......
2016 YLR 110
Mere admission of affixation of signatures/ thumb impressions on a document is not sufficient proof regarding its valid execution. The burden lies on the beneficiary to prove valid execution of the document, if the same is denied by the executant......
2014 LHC 7584
non-deposit of zar-e-soim within the stipulated period as required by section 24 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1994 would result in dismissal of the suit for possession through pre-emption. The writ petition was dismissed......
2015 CLC 657
Even otherwise, the sale deed was found to be produce of fraud and new entry in the revenue record on the basis thereof gives new cause of action. As such suit was declared to be within time......
2015 CLC 657
Slip of tongue in Evidence
A party cannot be penalized due to slip of tongue of a fact as the statement of a witness cannot be read in isolation, but an accumulative effect thereof has to be taken into consideration.. ..
2016 CLC 1258
Oral contract and its ingredients.... .
PLJ 2016 Lah 26
A promissory note even if was attested by two witnesses, the same remains within the definition of pro-note and a recovery suit on the basis of negotiable instrument is triable by the District Court under Order XXXVII rules 1 & 2 of the Civil Procedure Code of 1908.......
NLR 2014 CIVIL 54
Dismissal of suit & court fee...
Where the Court records findings on all issues and while dismissing the suit on merits requires the deficit Court fee should be by the plaintiff, the procedure is not justified......
PLJ 2014 Lah. 118
Limitation & Office objection
Once a suit, appeal or revision has been presented before the authorized officer of the Court within prescribed period of limitation, it cannot be treated time barred for the reason that the office has noted defects in the proceedings which have not been removed by the concerned party or his Advocate....... .(In this caes the appellant after the 8 month re submitted the case for filling although the office gave time of 3 days for removal of objection )
Lack of jurisdiction: Remedies against null and void decrees and orders (Indian Jurisdiction)
As a general principle if a court has got no jurisdiction to try and decide a suit, it cannot be conferred jurisdiction by consent, either express or implied (e.g. by absence of objection at appropriate time). A decree without jurisdiction is nullity and may be questioned at any stage including execution or even in collateral proceedings
Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan, AIR 1954 SC 340 (Followed in Foreshore Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. Praveen D. Desai (Dead) AIR 2015 SC 2006).
“ ......it is a fundamental principle well established that a decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is a nullity and that its invalidity could be set up whenever and wherever it is sought to be enforced or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction, whether it is pecuniary or territorial or whether, it is in respect of the subject – matter of action, strikes at the very authority of the court to pass any decree, and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of parties?.
Lack of pecuniary jurisdiction is an exception to the general principle in view of section 11 of Court Fees Act and a decree suffering from such defect is not to be treated as, what it would be but for the section, null and void‘. Same exception will apply to lack of territorial jurisdiction in view of section 21 C.P.C.
In Chief Engineer Hydel Project v. Ravinder Nath, AIR 2008 SC 1315 order of termination of service of a workman was set aside in a suit which decree was affirmed in First Appeal by ADJ and in Second Appeal by High Court. First time argued before the Supreme Court in SLP that civil court had no jurisdiction to decide the dispute and only labour Court had the jurisdiction with respect thereto. The Supreme Court permitted the argument to be raised and accepted the same.
Para 19 “.... Once the original decree itself has been held to be without jurisdiction and hit by the doctrine of coram non judice, there would be no question of upholding the same merely on the ground that the objection to the jurisdiction was not taken at the initial, First Appellate or the Second Appellate stage. ....”
In Hasham Abbas Sayyad v. Usman Abbas Sayyad AIR 2007 SC 1077 after passing of preliminary decree in a partition suit an application for sale of the property in dispute was filed whereupon the property was sold through auction. Neither final decree had been passed nor even proceedings for the same had been initiated. The Supreme Court held that the sale was nullity as it could take place only in execution of final decree which had not even been passed and that the final decree if passed would have been appealable.
“ 21. The core question is as to whether an order passed by a person lacking inherent jurisdiction would be a nullity. It will be so. The principles of estoppel, waiver and acquiescence or even resjudicata which are procedural in nature would have no application in a case where an order has been passed by the Tribunal/ Court which has no authority in that behalf. Any order passed by a court without jurisdiction would be coram non judice being a nullity, the same ordinarily should not be given effect to.
Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh and another v. L.V.A. Dikshitulu and others, AIR 1979 SC 193
M.D. Army Welfare Housing Organization v. Sumangal Services (P) Ltd. (2004) 8 SCC 619 HCL Modi v. DLF Universal AIR 2005 SC 4446 Ramesh Chand Ardawatiya v. Anil Panjwani, AIR 2003 SC 2508
“ 19. ….Where there is a special tribunal conferred with jurisdiction or exclusive jurisdiction to try a particular class of cases even then the civil court can entertain a civil suit of that class on availability of a few grounds. An exclusion of jurisdiction of the civil court is not to be readily inferred. (See Dhulabhai v. State of M.P, (1968) 3 SCR 662) An objection as to the exclusion of the civil court‘s jurisdiction for availability of alternative forum should be taken before the trial court and at the earliest, failing which the higher court may refuse to entertain the plea in the absence of proof of prejudice..."
(2013 PLC (C.S.) 492)
Giving discretion for grant of two additional marks to Selection/ Recruitment Committee at its own level through a corrigendum would promote misuse of discretion which could result in nepotism, corruption, feeling of despondency and hatred against the State and was detrimental and discriminatory to candidates who expected to be treated on merit. The court further observed that: Selection/ Recruitment Committee is expected to exercise discretion judiciously, honestly, objectively and in accordance with law.
2004 PLD 21 LAHORE-HIGH-COU RT-LAHORE
---O. XIX, R.3---Affidavit ---Admissibilit y---Procedure-- -Filing of counter-affidav it---Effect---A ffidavit, ipso facto is not admissible in evidence and its contents cannot be accepted Ipsi dixit without cross examination of deponent---Imma terial whether a counter-affidav it is filed by opposite side or not---Duty of Court is to call for record, direct cross examination of deponent and take evidence to form opinion........ .............
2016 MLD 1761
When plaintiff challenges registered sale deed or power of attorney on his behalf, suit for cancellation of document competent.
2016 MLD 1400
There should be some good cause or reason for filing list of witnesses after prescribed period of seven days of framing of issues. Mere desire of a party to do an act, which was required to be done in a particular manner, cannot be considered to be a good cause.......... ....
2016 MLD 438
It is settled law that omission to prescribe a procedure should not be taken as prohibition. PLD 1969 SC 65 relied upon.
2014 LHC 5682 2016 MLD 67
If someone does not want to become a witness or give evidence, there is no provision of law under which the court could compel him to necessarily give his testimony.
2014 LHC 3160 2016 MLD 337
The mother was not the natural guardian of the minor children, who could not execute any transaction/ agreement to sell on their behalf without permission of the court. Even otherwise unilateral agreement was not enforceable.
2014 LHC 3066 2016 MLD 1271
The effect of recording the evidence by the Reader of the Court instead of the Presiding Officer has been discussed and in the absence of any objection at the relevant time or showing as to what prejudice has been caused, no exception can be thereto.
2016 MLD 323, 2016 AC 362
Scribe of a document can only be a competent witness in terms of Articles 17 and 79 of the Qanun-e-Shahada t Order, 1984; if he has fixed his signatures as an attesting witness of the document.
2017 CLC 70 (Lahore )
Article 79..... " Attesting Witness "
Meaning, Attesting Witness was person who in presence of executant puts his signature or mark on it after he had seen executant or someone by executant's direction sign or affix his mark to it or after he had received from executant of personal Acknowledgement of his signature or mark or his signature or mark of such other person..
PLD 2007 Quetta 1
Ref. PLD 1985 SC 153
Waiver of Limitation.....
Limitation being a matter of statue and provisions being mandatory, it couldn't be waived and even if waived, it could be taken up by party waiving it and by Courts themselves..... ...
2014 CLC 87
Husband may file suit in family court for receiving Gifts and other........no t in civil court....
2004 CLC 1
Mere appendage of thumb impression of donor on the gift deed by itself without independent proof of factum of gift in favour of donee wouldn't be sufficient to establish that property had validly been gifted by donor to donee out of his free will......
Citation Name : 2000 CLC 71 LAHORE-HIGH-COU RT-LAHORE
Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD BOOTA
Side Opponent : BASHIR AHMAD
Code of Civil Procedure 1908 Ss. 9 & 115---Suit for damages and mesne profits ---Maintainabil ity--Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of---Plaintiff/ respondent had purchased land in dispute, but defendant/ petitioner not only refused to deliver possession of disputed land to plaintiff/ respondent, but also refused to give share of produce to him---Plaintiff /respondent filed suit for damages and mesne profits which was resisted by defendant/ petitioner contending that Civil court had no jurisdiction in the matter as same fell exclusively within jurisdiction of revenue Authorities---C ontention of defendant/ petitioner was repelled because the same was not only not raised before courts below, but it was also not pleaded that the defendant/ petitioner was a tenant under plaintiff/ respondent---Sui t for mesne profits and damages for use and occupation of land in dispute filed by plaintiff/ respondent was rightly found to be maintainable before Civil court, concurrently by courts below---Finding s of courts below based on facts and evidence on record, could not be interfered with by High court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.514 OF 2008
(Against the judgment dated 25.3.2008 of the Lahore High Court,
Only inter se parties of the suit are bound from the result of suit.....
"As far as the effect of the consent decree dated 10.6.1979 is concerned, suffice it to say that such decree in terms of Section 43 of the Specific Relief Act would only be binding inter se the parties i.e. the respondent and his father and would have no legal significance to affect and prejudice the rights of a third person. In the above context, the judgment reported as Muhammad Iqbal and others Vs. Khair Din through L.Rs. and others (2014 SCMR 33) is of relevance."
CIVIL APPEAL NO.514 OF 2008 (Against the judgment dated 25.3.2008 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No.9530/1998)
once a property is treated to be an evacuee property even erroneously, then the same cannot be held to be otherwise and the Civil Court in this behalf would have no jurisdiction,.. ....."
Muhammad Din and 8 others Vs. Province of the Punjab through Collector and others (PLD 2003 Lah. 441)
0 Comments