2017 PLP 1151 (YLR)
PERVIZ SHAH GILLANI and another — Appellants Versus Miss ZEEBA HAKIM and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2017 PLP 1151 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Humayon Khan, J |
| Parties | PERVIZ SHAH GILLANI and another — Appellants Versus Miss ZEEBA HAKIM and 3 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | The provisions of Order XVII, Rule 3, C.P.C. are, in nature, penal provisions and to apply the said provisions, the following conditions are to be satisfied:, (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), To attract the provisions of section 100, C.P.C., the appellants have to satisfy this Court that the Court subordinate to High Court has: |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 PLP 1151 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: The provisions of Order XVII, Rule 3, C.P.C. are, in nature, penal provisions and to apply the said provisions, the following conditions are to be satisfied:, (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), To attract the provisions of section 100, C.P.C., the appellants have to satisfy this Court that the Court subordinate to High Court has:, (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2017 PLP 1151 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh bench comprising: Muhammad Humayon Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 PLP 1151 (YLR) (PERVIZ SHAH GILLANI and another — Appellants Versus Miss ZEEBA HAKIM and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Rashid for Appellants.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos.1 to 4.
Headnotes / Summary
O. XVII, R. 3
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 12
Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell
Scope
Plaintiffs and their counsel continuously remained absent and suit was dismissed for non-prosecution
Application for restoration of suit was filed but same was also dismissed in default
Last opportunity for recording of evidence was given to the plaintiffs but they absented
Provisions of O. XVII, R. 3, C.P.C. had been correctly applied by the courts below
Nothing was on record that courts below had committed any legal error in deciding the matter
Second appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Qutab-ud-Din v. Gulzar and 2 others PLD 1991 SC 1109; Mst. Hamida Begum v. Mst. Husain Akhtar 1992 CLC 2515; Mst. Nazima Batool alias NazimBatool v. Sabar Ali Shah 2004 CLC 1175; Industrial Sales and Service, Karachi and another v. Archifar Opal Laboratories Ltd., Karachi PLD 1969 Kar. 418 and Syed Tahir Hussain Mehmoodi and others v. Agha Syed Liaqat Ali and others 2014 SCMR 637 ref. Rana Tanveer Khan v. Naseer-ud-Din and others 2015 SCMR 1401; Madan Gopal and 4 others v. Maran Bepari and 3 others PLD 1969 SC 617; Mst. Nishadah Begum and 3 others v. Muhammad Ayub Khan PLD 1988 SC (AJ&K) 203; Mst. Kapoori and 4 others v. Man Khan and 6 others 1992 SCMR 2298; Abdul Rashid v. Bashiran and another 1996 SCMR 808 and Haji Sultan Ahmed through Legal Heirs v. Naeem Raza and 6 others 1996 SCMR 1729 rel.
O. XVII, R. 3
Applicability of O.XVII, R.3, C.P.C.
Conditions. (a) the record shows, without any doubt, the default of the party to lead evidence; (b) the conduct of the party, proved to have committed the default, must not be excusable; (c) once the case of a party falls within the purview and mischief of law, than, neither any concession should be given nor a lenient view favouring him should be resorted to; (d) if the case is squarely falls within the mischief of Order XVII, Rule 3, C.P.C., the Court is not, in any manner, obliged to adjourn the case and require the party to appear and examine himself as a witness on the subsequent date; (e) if the party was cautioned on last occasion, that means that he was put to notice that if he fails to adduce evidence, action shall be taken; (f) where the provisions of Order XVII, Rule 3, C.P.C. are attracted, the Court has no option except to take action in accordance with the provisions of Order XVII, Rule 3, C.P.C.; and (g) the decision should be forthwith and on merits of the case.
Ss. 100 & 101
Provisions of S.100, C.P.C. when attracted. (a) based its decision contrary to law or some usage having the force of law; (b) failed to determine some material issue of law or usage having the force of law; (c) committed a substantial error or defect in the procedure provided by C.P.C. or by any other law for the time being in force, which may possibly have produced error or defect in the decision of the case upon the merits. As per section 101, C.P.C., no second appeal shall lie except on the above-noted grounds as mentioned in section 100 C.P.C. Madan Gopal and 4 others v. Maran Bepari and 3 others PLD 1969 SC 617; Mst. Nishadah Begum and 3 others v. Muhammad Ayub Khan PLD 1988 SC (AJ&K) 203; Mst. Kapoori and 4 others v. Man Khan and 6 others 1992 SCMR 2298; Abdul Rashid v. Bashiran and another 1996 SCMR 808 and Haji Sultan Ahmed through Legal Heirs v. Naeem Raza and 6 others 1996 SCMR 1729 ref.