2009 PLP 251 (YLR)
GHULAM MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD KHAN — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 251 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khalil Ahmad, J |
| Parties | GHULAM MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD KHAN — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 251 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 251 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khalil Ahmad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 251 (YLR) (GHULAM MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD KHAN — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ----O. V, R.20, O. VI, R.17, O.IX, R.13, Ss.115 & 151---Revision---Proper Service-Affixing/Chaspangi of copy of summons---Effect---Setting aside of ex-parte order---Petitioner had urged that his counsel had died and no notice was served upon him; and that only report of Chaspangi was made which could not be termed as a `proper service' on the petitioner because he had no notice of said affixation/Chaspangi--- Pre-admission notice in the revision was issued on three dates and thereafter also adjournment was sought by the petitioner and petitioner having failed to appear even on adjourned date of hearing, revision was dismissed for non- prosecution---Counsel for petitioner filed application for recalling dismissal order, which was fixed for hearing when, on account of death of counsel for the petitioner, notice was ordered to be issued to the petitioner and thereafter Chaspangi was effected by the Process Server---No ground for recalling impugned order having been made out, petition was dismissed.
- Sh. Naveed Shaharyar for Petitioner.
- KHALIL AHMAD, J.---This is an application under Order IX read with section 151, C.P.C. for recall of order dated 26-1-2007, revival of C.M. No.912-C/2001 and hearing of Civil Revision on merits. Applicant has urged that his counsel Mr. Ehsanullah Khan Lilla, Advocate had died and no notice was served upon him and there is only a report of Chaspangi which cannot be termed as a proper service on the applicant/petitioner because petitioner had no notice of fixation of C.M. No.912-C/2001 before this Court on 26-1-2007.
- 2. This Court on 21-12-2006 has passed an order that unfortunately Mr. Ehsanullah Khan Lilla, Advocate for the petitioner has expired. Office shall issue fresh notice to 'the petitioner for arranging his representation. Thereafter, said C.M. cam up for hearing on 26-1-2007.
- 4. Pre-admission notice in the Civil Revision was issued on 3-8-2001. On 13-9-2001 and 19-9-2001 adjournment was sought by the learned counsel for the petitioner. On 5-11-2001, Civil Revision was dismissed for non-prosecution. On 29-11-2001 Mr. Ehsanullah Khan Lilla, Advocate filed C.M. No.912-C/2001 for recalling dismissal order dated 5-11-2001. C.M. was fixed for 21-12-2006 when on account of death of Mr. Ehsanullah Khan Lilla, Advocate notice was ordered to be issued to the petitioner and thereafter Chaspangi was affected by the Process Server. No ground for recalling order dated 26-1-2007 is made out. The petition is dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
KHALIL AHMAD, J.
This is an application under Order IX read with section 151, C.P.C. for recall of order dated 26-1-2007, revival of C.M. No.912-C/2001 and hearing of Civil Revision on merits. Applicant has urged that his counsel Mr. Ehsanullah Khan Lilla, Advocate had died and no notice was served upon him and there is only a report of Chaspangi which cannot be termed as a proper service on the applicant/petitioner because petitioner had no notice of fixation of C.M. No.912-C/2001 before this Court on 26-1-2007.
2. This Court on 21-12-2006 has passed an order that unfortunately Mr. Ehsanullah Khan Lilla, Advocate for the petitioner has expired. Office shall issue fresh notice to 'the petitioner for arranging his representation. Thereafter, said C.M. cam up for hearing on 26-1-2007.
3. On the said date, Process Server reported that the petitioner on getting the news disappeared and refused to accept the notice therefore Chaspangi was duly affected. The Process Server also submitted his affidavit. This Court rightly passed order that the petitioner has refused to accept service and defaulted to appear despite Chaspangi.
4. Pre-admission notice in the Civil Revision was issued on 3-8-2001. On 13-9-2001 and 19-9-2001 adjournment was sought by the learned counsel for the petitioner. On 5-11-2001, Civil Revision was dismissed for non-prosecution. On 29-11-2001 Mr. Ehsanullah Khan Lilla, Advocate filed C.M. No.912-C/2001 for recalling dismissal order dated 5-11-2001. C.M. was fixed for 21-12-2006 when on account of death of Mr. Ehsanullah Khan Lilla, Advocate notice was ordered to be issued to the petitioner and thereafter Chaspangi was affected by the Process Server. No ground for recalling order dated 26-1-2007 is made out. The petition is dismissed. H.B.T./G-43/L Petition dismissed.