2018 PLP 442 (YLR)
HAZRAT KHAN — Appellant Versus MOHAMMAD GHULAM ABBAS — Respondent
| Citation | 2018 PLP 442 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Alam, J |
| Parties | HAZRAT KHAN — Appellant Versus MOHAMMAD GHULAM ABBAS — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2018 PLP 442 (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 2018 PLP 442 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court bench comprising: Muhammad Alam, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2018 PLP 442 (YLR) (HAZRAT KHAN — Appellant Versus MOHAMMAD GHULAM ABBAS — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mohammad Hussain Shehzad and Latif Shah for Appellant.
- Johar Ali for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
O. XX, R. 5
Scope
Plaintiff had disclosed cause of action for the suit
Failure of plaintiff for not disclosing the cause of action would entail rejection of plaint and not dismissal of suit
Trial Court was bound to record its findings on all the issues instead of basing on any one of the issues
Impugned order was bad in the eye of law
Impugned judgment and decree were set aside
Case was remanded to the Trial Court with the direction to resume the trial from the stage where it was given up
Appeal was allowed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ALAM, J.
This is a first appeal against order dated 06-05-2013 of the learned Civil Judge First Class Shounter, District Astore, whereby, the learned trial court based the impugned judgment on the findings on issue No.1. For ready reference, I reproduce the last two paragraphs of the findings of the learned trial court on issue No.1:- In the circumstances above, I am on clear view that plaintiff fails in disclose cause of action against defendant hence issue held proved in negative. Issues Nos.2 to 19 left un-discussed as the issue No.1 is sufficient to decide the case. In the light of my findings on issue No.1, plaintiff failed in disclosing the cause of action against defendant hence suit in hand is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. File after due completion be consigned to record.
2. Appellant / plaintiff filed suit (Civil Suit No.07/2010) against respondent/ defendant in the trial court for recovery of suit amount Rs.486,800/-. The suit is based in the light of agreement/ compromise deed dated 03-01-2009, allegedly affected between parties to the case. During trial of the case, learned trial court framed 19 issues. While giving findings, the learned trial court selected only issue No.1, which goes as under:-- Whether plaintiff has cause of action against defendant? OPP
3. I have gone through the file and heard learned counsel for parties. In the case in hand, the above findings of the learned trial court are very clearly wrong. I have gone through the plaint, wherein, in para No.11, appellant/plaintiff has very properly disclosed the cause of action for the suit. Moreover, failure of plaintiff for not disclosing the cause of action is entailing to rejection of the plaint and never dismissal of a suit. So this very fact is sufficient to hold that the impugned order is bad in the eye of law. In my opinion, learned trial court is legally bound to give its findings on all issues instead of basing his findings on any one issue as once the trial court has concluded all trial proceedings.
4. I, therefore, allow this appeal, set aside impugned judgment/order dated 06-05-2013, but remand the cases back to the trial Court with direction to resume the trial of the case from the stage where it was given up. Appeal allowed accordingly. Parties to bear their own costs. This file be consigned to record. ZC/63/GB Cases remanded.