1991 PLP 1147 (SCMR)
AL-QASIM TRADERS — Petitioner Versus HABIB BANK LIMITED, MULTAN — Respondent
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1147 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ. and |
| Parties | AL-QASIM TRADERS — Petitioner Versus HABIB BANK LIMITED, MULTAN — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1147 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1147 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ. and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1147 (SCMR) (AL-QASIM TRADERS — Petitioner Versus HABIB BANK LIMITED, MULTAN — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Raja Muhammad Akram, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 26th March, 1990.
- Raja Muhammad Akram, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 26-7-1989 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan, in COS 1 of 1988).
O. XXVI, R.2
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Examination of witnesses on commission
High Court as original Trial Court for adjudication of dispute regarding recovery of money, dismissed petitioner's application for examination of certain witnesses on commission
Petitioner admitted that distance of places wherefrom witnesses were to be summoned from the seat of Court where trial was taking place was hardly about two hours and one hour air journey respectively
Discretionary order passed by High Court refusing the facility of examination of witnesses on commission was neither against any law nor principle
Leave to appeal refused in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
(On appeal from the order dated 26‑7‑1989 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan, in COS 1 of 1988). ‑‑‑‑O. XXVI, R.2‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Examination of witnesses on commission‑‑‑High Court as original Trial Court for adjudication of dispute regarding recovery of money, dismissed petitioner's application for examination of certain witnesses on commission‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Petitioner admitted that distance of places wherefrom witnesses were to be summoned from the seat of Court where trial was taking place was hardly about two hours and one hour air journey respectively‑‑‑Discretionary order passed by High Court refusing the facility of examination of witnesses on commission was neither against any law nor principle‑‑‑Leave to appeal refused in circumstances. Raja Muhammad Akram, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 26th March, 1990. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J.‑‑‑This petition for leave to appeal is directed; against an interim order by the High Court acting as original trial Court for adjudication of a dispute regarding recovery of money. By the impugned order the High Court has dismissed the application of the petitioner for examination of certain witnesses on commission. Learned counsel stated that the witnesses are from Karachi and Lahore. He admits that the distance of both the places from the seat of the Court where trial is taking place is hardly about 2 hours and one hour air journey, respectively. In the circumstances of the case the discretionary order passed by the High Court refusing the facility of examination of witnesses on commission to the petitioner is neither against any law nor principle. Leave to appeal, accordingly, is refused. AA./A‑748/S Leave refused.