-O.XVI R. 1 & O.XVIII R. 2--Suit for possession through pre-emption--Application for producing of additional evidence--

 PLJ 2023 Lahore (Note) 57
[Multan Bench, Multan]
Present: Ali Akbar Qureshi, J.
Dr. MUHAMMAD USMAN MUBARIK--Petitioner
versus
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE etc.--Respondents
W.P. No. 15274 of 2014, decided on 5.3.2015.

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)--

----O.XVI R. 1 & O.XVIII R. 2--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199--Constitutional petition--Suit for possession through pre-emption--Application for producing of additional evidence--Names of official witnesses were not mentioned in list of witnesses--Rejection of application and revision petition--No bar of jurisdiction--Challenge to--Petitioner can summon official witnesses if not included in list of witnesses, through Court--Petitioner be allowed to summon only official witnesses obviously through Court and there is no bar of jurisdiction of trial Court to summon official witnesses through Court for real adjudication of matter--Petition allowed.  [Para 5] A & B

1995 CLC 327 and 1999 CLC 1142 ref.

Mr. Muhammad Bilal Masud, Advocate for Petitioner.

Malik Zafar Mehboob Langrial, Advocate for Respondent
No. 3.

Date of hearing: 5.3.2015.

Order

This constitutional petition is directed against the orders dated 31.10.2014 and 24.09.2014, passed by the learned Courts below, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for summoning the witnesses was dismissed.

2. As per the record, a result was filed by the petitioner for possession through pre-emption against the Respondent No. 3, wherein both the parties completed their affirmative oral as well as documentary evidence and the learned trial Court fixed the case for the rebuttal evidence of the petitioner/plaintiff. The petitioner, at this stage, filed an application for summoning the clerk of the post-office and postman. The application was opposed by the Respondent No. 3 and the learned trial Court, after hearing the arguments of the parties, rejected .the application on 24.09.2014. Against which, petitioner filed revision petition before the learned District Judge, Muzaffargarh which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Muzaffargarh.

3. The record disclose, that the petitioner filed an application on two grounds; that the petitioner may be allowed to summon the official witnesses in rebuttal or as an Additional evidence. The learned Courts below and particularly learned revisional Court dismissed the revision, treating the application filed by the petitioner for adducing the additional evidence.

4. Although the petitioner could not mention the names of the witnesses, sought to be summoned, in the list of witnesses but as evident from the record, the petitioner is seeking the permission to summon the official witnesses. The provisions of Order 16 Rule 1 and Order 18 Rule 2, CPC are fully attracted and applicable in this case.

5. According to aforementioned provisions of law, the petitioner can summon the official witnesses if not included in the list of witnesses, through the Court. Even otherwise, keeping in view the facts of the case, it is necessary that for the fair and just decision of the case, the petitioner be allowed to summon only the official witnesses obviously through the Court and there is no bar of jurisdiction of the learned trial Court to summon the official witnesses through the Court for the real adjudication of the matter. Reliance is placed on Mst. Shanaz Begum and 4 others v. Ashiq Hussain Bhatti and 2 others (1995 CLC 327) and Muhammad Nawaz and another v. Additional District Judge, Sargodha and 11 others (1999 CLC 1142).

6. Learned counsel for the Respondent No. 3 has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground, that the petitioner cannot be allowed to fill in the lacunas at this stage, therefore, the writ petition be dismissed.

7. I am afraid, that the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent have any force in the presence of the afore-referred provisions of law.

8. Resultantly, this petition is allowed. The orders passed by the learned Courts below are set aside and the petitioner is allowed to summon only official witnesses through the Court. No order as to cost.

(Y.A.)  Petition Allowed