1994 PLP 2198 (MLD)
RASUL BAKHSH — Petitioner Versus MUSHTAQ — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 2198 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | RASUL BAKHSH — Petitioner Versus MUSHTAQ — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 2198 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 2198 (MLD)?
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: 1994 PLP 2198 (MLD) (RASUL BAKHSH — Petitioner Versus MUSHTAQ — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Pir Anwar Rehman for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
O.XIV, Rr.1 & 5
Re-casting of issue so as to shift the burden of proof
Plaintiff filed suit wherein he denied execution of disputed registered sale-deed and onus of issue was placed on plaintiff
Defendant, on application submitted for production of original sale-deed, stated that original deed was not available as it had been misplaced
Faced with that situation, plaintiff moved application for recasting issue so as to place burden of proof on defendant instead of plaintiff
Plaintiff having challenged genuineness of sale-deed, onus obviously lay on him
Onus would shift as and when plaintiff would deny execution of said deed in his evidence and factum of execution of same would be proved by producing positive evidence by defendant who had based his claim on such agreement
Trial Court rightly dismissed application of plaintiff for re-casting issue.
Judgment & Decree
This revision petition is directed against the order, dated 18-7-1993 of learned Civil Judge whereby he rejected the application of the petitioner for re-casting the issue so as to place the burden of proof on the defendants. The petitioner is admittedly plaintiff in the suit wherein sale-deed registered on 13-5-1979 has been denied to have been executed by him. Onus of the issue was placed on the plaintiff. On an application submitted for the production of the original sale-deed, respondents-defendants stated that the original sale-deed is not available and has been misplaced. Faced with this situation, petitioner moved an application for shifting of the burden of proof on the defendants and not upon the plaintiff. In support of this plea, reference was made to the case of Said Jamal v. Ghulam Zohra 1992 CLC 1714. In the cited precedent this Court refused to interfere in the matter in exercise of extraordinary Constitutional jurisdiction. This precedent as such cannot be of any help to the petitioner. Fact of the matter is that petitioner being of plaintiff having challenged genuineness of the sale-deed, onus obviously lies on him. This onus will, however, shift as and when the petitioner denies execution of the said, document in his evidence and the factum of execution of the said sale deed will be proved by producing positive evidence by the respondent-defendants who seek rights under the agreement. No justifiable exception, therefore, can be taken to the view which prevailed with the learned trial Court. Error of jurisdiction having not been pointed out, interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction is not warranted. Dismissed in limine. H.B.T./R-153/L Revision dismissed.