1992 PLP 945 (CLC)

(b) Administration of justice‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑‑of judicial record being a serious matter not only the Trial Court concerned, but also the District Judge should have taken serious notice of it had come to his knowledge‑‑‑To resolve such controversy with a view to avoid its effects on the rights of parties, concerned witness could be resummoned and re‑examined with the help of relevant record to ascertain the real position because such witness could not say anything against or beyond the entries thereof, and it should be done by the Trial Court, who was directed to decide the case, after re‑examining him, without waiting for the orders or decision of Board of Revenue in some matter, which Trial Court was not supposed to await. Mushtaq Mehdi Akhtar for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 18th September, 1991. Muhammad Rafi petitioner, who is plaintiff in Suit~No.302 of 1987, pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Wazirabad, against Municipal Committee, Wazirabad, by this writ petition calls in question the order, dated 10‑6‑1990, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gujranwala (respondent No.2), affirming the order, dated 28‑2‑1989, whereby Civil Judge. Wazirabad (respondent No.3) had scored out the words from the statement of Fateh Muhammad (P.W.4) for the reason that the same had not been written by him and they were subsequently added in his statement by some one by way of interpolation. While doing so, he directed that these words would not be read in the statement of that witness. 2. 1 have heard the learned counsel representing the parties and perused the record with their assistance. I am inclined to agree with the findings of the learned Additional District Judge that the learned Civil Judge, Wazirabad, was the best Judge to decide: whether or not the words had been subsequently added by some one in the statement of Fateh Muhammad Patwari (PWA) written by him during the course of recording the evidence in the suit pending in his Court and if he says that these words were, at some subsequent stage, inserted in his statement by way of interpolation, then he is to be believed.

3. The interpolation of judicial record is a serious matter and not only the learned Civil Judge concerned but also the learned District Judge, Gujranwala, should have taken serious notice of if it had come to his knowledge. Anyhow, to resolve the controversy with a view to avoid its effects on the rights of the parties, Fateh Muhammad Patwari could be re‑summoned and re‑examined with the help of the relevant record to ascertain the real position because he could not say anything against or beyond the entries thereof and it should be now done by the learned Civil Judge, who is directed to decide the case, after re‑examining him, as soon as possible, without waiting for the orders or decision of the Board of Revenue in some matter which he was not supposed to await.

4. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of accordingly. AA/M‑186/L Order accedingly.