2000 PLP 1905 (YLR)

This appeal is directed against the order of learned Judge Family Court, Muzaffarabad, dated 20‑8‑1999. The brief facts forming the background of the present appeal are that the appellant filed a suit before the learned Judge in the Family Court, Muzaffarabad against the respondent on 27‑8‑1999. She moved an application before the said Court to summon Barkatullah S/o Hidayatullah, Abdur Rashid S/o Hamidullah, Muhammad Roshan S/o Barkatullah and Mir Muhammad as witnesses in the case. She further requested the Court that she may be allowed to produce documentary evidence. This application was dismissed by the Trial Court through the impugned order, dated 20‑8‑1999, the legality and correctness of which has been challenged through this appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case. The Trial Court dismissed the application by observing that the number of the witnesses intended to be produced in support of the plaint, their names and addresses and brief summary of the facts to which they would depose, was required by law to be submitted alongwith the plaint and that the law does not empower the Family Court to allow the parties to produce any evidence or introduce any other witness at any later stage. Subsection (2) of section 7 of the Family Court Act deals with the subject- matter of the application. This subsection is as under: ‑‑‑ "The plaint shall contain all facts relating to the dispute and shall contain a schedule giving the number of witness intended to be produced in support of the plaint, the names and addresses of the witnesses and brief summary of the case to which they would depose: Provided that the parties may, with the permission of the Court, call any witness at any later stage, if the Court considers such evidence expedient in the interest of justice." There is no doubt that a pliant is required to contain a brief summary of the facts and the names and addresses of the witnesses to be produced in support of the plaint, but at the same time, this section does riot place any embargo on the powers of the Family Court to allow the parties to produce any evidence at any later stage. The proviso under the said subsection is clear on the point and it gives ample powers to the Court to summon any document or to call any witness at any stage, on the application of either party, if the same is, in the opinion of the Court, expedient in the interest of justice. Therefore, the observation made by the Trial Court in the case, while dismissing the application, is not correct and the same is set aside. The Trial Court, while deciding the application, has not applied its mind to the merits of the application, whereas it was the duty of the Court to decide the asme on merits. In my view, it will not be proper for me to decide the application on merits, therefore, the case is remanded back to the Trial Court to decide the application filed by the petitioner on merits. In the terms indicated above, the appeal is accepted. H.B.T./16/Sh.C.(AJ&K) Appeal accepted.