P L D 1992 Supreme Court 30 (PLP)
Mst. RAHIM NOOR — Petitioner Versus Mst. SALIM BIBI and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1992 Supreme Court 30 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ. |
| Parties | Mst. RAHIM NOOR — Petitioner Versus Mst. SALIM BIBI and 2 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1992 Supreme Court 30 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1992 Supreme Court 30 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1992 Supreme Court 30 (PLP) (Mst. RAHIM NOOR — Petitioner Versus Mst. SALIM BIBI and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Hamad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
0. VI, R. 17
Permission to amend pleadings was not prohibited even at late stage, when, of course it was otherwise necessary.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ. --Permission to amend a plaint granted to respondent/plaintiff's side has been brought under challenge through this petition, for leave to appeal. The High Court held that respondent No.l had based her suit on a sale-decd wherein the vendees are mentioned as Khuda Bakhsh and Rahim Bakhsh. The respondent wanted the correction of her father's name in the plaint as Rahim Bakhsh. The respondent had also as P.W.4 stated that she is the daughter of Rahim Bakhsh and niece of Khuda Bakhsh. Thus the exercise of discretion by the trial Court was held to be legal and proper. Learned counsel has contended that it was at a very late stage that the amendment was sought. The petitioner has been put to inconvenience. She will have to submit a fresh written statement and the possibility of new issues and further evidence cannot be excluded. But this, even if so, cannot relieve the petitioner also from being fair and just to the other side. Learned counsel perhaps was not aware that the respondent when appearing as her own witness had given her father's name as Rahim Bakhsh nearly 3 years before the making of the application. It was on account of gross mistake committed by the lawyers and/or their agents and may be by the trial Court also that the correction could not be made at an earlier stage. Learned counsel vehemently argued that notwithstanding all this the respondent should not be permitted to call herself as the daughter of Rahim Bakhsh. In other words he, on account of mere technicality wants to change the real parentage of the respondent. The Courts in Pakistan cannot permit nor can such an approach to law and justice be accepted as valid. Even our Constitutional set up, apart from the laws, does not permit it. C.P.C. does not prohibit the permission to amend pleadings even at late stage, when, of course it is otherwise necessary. The impugned order being eminently just and proper this petition, accordingly, is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. M.BA./R-184/1, ???????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave refused,