2003 PLP 1863 (CLC)
FAIZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1863 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | FAIZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE and others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1863 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1863 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1863 (CLC) (FAIZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Nadeem Iqbal Chaudhry for Petitioner.
- Zulfiqar Ali for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
O. VII, R.2, O. VIII, Rr. 1, 10 & O. IX, Rr. 6, 7, 13
Ex parte decree, setting aside of
Ex parte decree passed in suit was set aside by Trial Court on application of defendant and case was adjourned for filing written statement by defendant
Defendant having failed to file written statement despite obtaining several adjournments, his defence was struck off-- Validity
In spite of some slackness shown by the defendant in filing written statement, one more opportunity could have been given to him, for filing his written statement
Defendant was directed to file written statement on next date of hearing subject to payment of Rs.1,000 as costs
In case of non-payment of said costs petition would be deemed to have been dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
O. VII, R.2, O. VIII, Rr. 1, 10 & O. IX, Rr. 6, 7, 13
Ex parte decree, setting aside of
Ex parte decree passed in suit was set aside by Trial Court on application of defendant and case was adjourned for filing written statement by defendant
Defendant having failed to file written statement despite obtaining several adjournments, his defence was struck off-- Validity
In spite of some slackness shown by the defendant in filing written statement, one more opportunity could have been given to him, for filing his written statement
Defendant was directed to file written statement on next date of hearing subject to payment of Rs.1,000 as costs
In case of non-payment of said costs petition would be deemed to have been dismissed. Nadeem Iqbal Chaudhry for Petitioner. Zulfiqar Ali for Respondents. Respondent filed a suit for recovery against the petitioner, which was ex parte decreed. Petitioner moved an application for setting aside A the said decree which was allowed by the trial Court. On 15-1-2002, the learned Civil Judge adjourned the case to 29-1-2002 for filing of written statement by the petitioner. On this date, the written statement was not filed and adjournment was sought, upon which the case was adjourned to 18-2-2002. Again on 18-2-2002, a similar request was made and the case was postponed to 19-3-2002, when the petitioner could not file the written statement. Resultantly, his defence was struck off.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that sufficient opportunity was not given to the petitioner for filing the written statement; besides the Court had not passed any speaking order under the provisions of Order VIII, rule 1, C.P.C. for filing of the written statement, therefore, the provisions of Order VIII, rule 10, C.P.C. could not be applied.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and find that one more opportunity should have been given to the petitioner, however there is some slackness on the part of the petitioner, in filing the written statement. In the interest of justice by imposition of costs, the respondent can be compensated, Resultantly, the impugned order is set aside. The petitioner is directed to file his written statement before the Court on the next date of hearing, subject to payment of Rs.1,000 as costs. In case or non-payment of costs, this petition, would be deemed to have been dismissed. H.B.T./F-185/L Petition allowed.