P L D 1979 Karachi 488 (PLP)
MUNSHI-Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE AND ANOTHER-Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1979 Karachi 488 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Judge after coming to conclusion that sufficient cause was shown for non-appearance-Held, not without jurisdiction-Such order, being neither in excess of jurisdiction nor passed with material irregularity, does not warrant interference by High Court in revisional jurisdiction under S. 115.-Appeal (civil)-Revision (civil). |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian, J |
| Parties | MUNSHI-Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE AND ANOTHER-Respondents |
| Primary Law | (6) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1979 Karachi 488 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: (6) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1979 Karachi 488 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Judge after coming to conclusion that sufficient cause was shown for non-appearance-Held, not without jurisdiction-Such order, being neither in excess of jurisdiction nor passed with material irregularity, does not warrant interference by High Court in revisional jurisdiction under S. 115.-Appeal (civil)-Revision (civil). bench comprising: Ajmal Mian, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1979 Karachi 488 (PLP) (MUNSHI-Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE AND ANOTHER-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- -- O. XLI, r. 21 read with S. 115-Appeal-Rebearing of-Rehearing of appeal can be ordered when (a) respondent not served, and (b) respondent prevented from appearing for sufficient reason-Reason for non-appearance on date of hearing supported by a personal affidavit of Advocate-Order of rehearing passed by Additional District
- S. H. Riavi for Respondent No. 1.
- Dates of hearing : 18th and 25th November 1978.
Headnotes / Summary
Judge after coming to conclusion that sufficient cause was shown for non-appearance-Held, not without jurisdiction-Such order, being neither in excess of jurisdiction nor passed with material irregularity, does not warrant interference by High Court in revisional jurisdiction under S. 115.-[Appeal (civil)-Revision (civil)]. Rahim Bux and others v. Gul Muhammad and others P L D 1971 Lab. 746 ref. -- S. 115-Revision-Concurrent finding of fact-Cannot be set aside on ground that appreciation of evidence was not proper. [Revision (civil)-Evidence]. Ismail Munshi for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑ O. XLI, r. 21 read with S. 115‑Appeal‑Rebearing of‑Rehearing of appeal can be ordered when (a) respondent not served, and (b) respondent prevented from appearing for sufficient reason‑Reason for non‑appearance on date of hearing supported by a personal affidavit of Advocate‑Order of rehearing passed by Additional District Judge after coming to conclusion that sufficient cause was shown for non‑appearance‑Held, not without jurisdiction‑Such order, being neither in excess of jurisdiction nor passed with material irregularity, does not warrant interference by High Court in revisional jurisdiction under S. 115.‑[Appeal (civil)‑Revision (civil)]. Rahim Bux and others v. Gul Muhammad and others P L D 1971 Lab. 746 ref. (6) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑ ‑‑ S. 115‑Revision‑Concurrent finding of fact‑Cannot be set aside on ground that appreciation of evidence was not proper. [Revision (civil)‑Evidence]. Ismail Munshi for Applicant. S. H. Riavi for Respondent No.