2014 PLP 199 (YLR)

SADIQ HUSSAIN BHATTI, J.

Plaintiff, The Trustee of Port of Karachi, has filed instant suit for recovery of Rs.23,471,815 against defendant Messrs Sahaf Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd., with following prayers:-- "That on the facts, circumstances, and legal position stated above, judgment and decree may kindly be passed against the defendant. (i) Judgment and Decree against the defendant for the sum of Rs.23,471,815 with mark-up at existing bank rate from the date of filing of the suit till the reliazation of the whole decretal amount: (ii) Cost of the suit and other legal expenses incurred in the suit: (iii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be awarded.

2. Notices were issued to the defendant but the bailiff reported that the defendant has left the place, address whereof was given in the title of the plaint. Learned counsel for the plaintiff requested that Notices may be issued to the defendant through publication as he was not aware of any other address of the defendant and accordingly vide order dated 10-9-2007, it was ordered that notice be served upon the defendant through publication in Urdu and English newspapers having widely circulated, in Lahore. Notices were published in daily "Jang" and in daily "Dawn" in Lahore in their 9-10-2009 Issues. In view of such publication, service was held good vide order dated 21-12-2009 and it was ordered that the matter may be proceeded ex parte against the defendant.

3. Thereafter, the case was fixed for final disposal and vide order dated 29-3-2013, the plaintiff was directed to file affidavit-in-ex parte proof. Accordingly, on 14-5-2013, the plaintiff's witness, namely, Muhammad Naeem appeared in Court and produced his affidavit-in-ex parte proof on behalf of plaintiff as Exh.P.W.1/3 and other documents as Exh.P.W.1/4 to P.W.1/14 as well as "X" and "X-1". As no one was present on behalf of the defendant, therefore, the said witness was not subjected to cross-examination and the learned counsel for the plaintiff has closed his side. The case was fixed in court on 4-9-2013 for final disposal, and on the same day arguments of learned counsel for the plaintiff were heard as again nobody appeared on behalf of defendant.

4. The plaint in suit as well as affidavit-in-exparte proof filed by the witness of the plaintiff, namely, Muhammad Naeem, both are on oath. There is nothing on record in rebuttal. Accordingly, I find no impediment in decreeing the suit in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant, as prayed, as appearance was made by the defendant despite of service through publication.

5. In view of the above, instant suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant as prayed. SAK/T-9/K Suit decreed.