1999 PLP 985 (MLD)
Mst. AMIR BEGUM — Petitioner Versus MANZOOR AHMAD Respondent
| Citation | 1999 PLP 985 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. AMIR BEGUM — Petitioner Versus MANZOOR AHMAD Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 985 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 985 (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: 1999 PLP 985 (MLD) (Mst. AMIR BEGUM — Petitioner Versus MANZOOR AHMAD Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Hakim Abdul Sattar Dil for Petitioner.
- Ch. Muhammad Siddique Safdar for Respondent
Headnotes / Summary
O.VII, R.11
Court Fees Act (VII of 1870), S.4(a)
Value of suit for purpose of court-fee assessed by the appellant/plaintiff had been changed by Trial Court
Effect
Where the valuation of the suit fixed by the plaintiff had been changed by Trial Court valuation for appeal would be the one fixed by the Trial Court.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD NASIM CHAUDHRY, J.
On 14-1-1996 while disposing of Civil Revision No. 20 of 1995 the petitioner was directed to make up the deficiency of court-fee amounting to Rs. 15,000 before the District Judge, Khanewal within a period of 30 days failing which she was made liable to meet the penalty narrated under Order 7, Rule 11 read with section 141, C. P. C. She has filed this petition seeking extension in time for the purpose of submission of the aforesaid court-fee on the ground that she became seriously ill and that she could not collect the amount.
2. This petition is supported by an affidavit.
3. This petition is a female and keeping in view the recitals of the application the same is accepted and the petitioner is allowed to make up the deficiency of court-fee till 31-3-1996 failing which she shall be liable to face the legal consequence as already expressed in the matter.
4. If the District Court has already applied the penal provisions under Order 7, Rule 11, Civil Procedure Code, this order shall remain redundant and shall be considered as inoperative.
5. Copy dasti subject to usual charges, if any. C. M. A./A-269/L Order Accordingly.