YLR 2009

2009 PLP 180 (YLR)

NASIR IQBAL BUTT and others — Petitioners Versus Mst. SURRIYA BEGUM — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Civil Revision No.51 of 2008, decided on 15th September, 2008.
Honorable Judges
Mian Saqib Nisar, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2009 PLP 180 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Mian Saqib Nisar, J
Parties NASIR IQBAL BUTT and others — Petitioners Versus Mst. SURRIYA BEGUM — Respondent
Primary Law Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 180 (YLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 180 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Saqib Nisar, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 180 (YLR) (NASIR IQBAL BUTT and others — Petitioners Versus Mst. SURRIYA BEGUM — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Representation

  • Ch. Riasat Ali for Petitioners.
  • Ch. Inayat Ullah for Respondent.

Headnotes / Summary

O. VI, R. 17

Amendment of pleadings

Defendants had contended that if permitted to make amendment as proposed in their application under O. VI, R.17, C.P.C., which had been dismissed by the Trial Court they would not lead any further evidence, either oral or documentary

Such offer having been accepted by the counsel for plaintiffs the defendants were allowed to file amended written statement in the Trial Court within specified period without fail

Order having been dictated in presence of counsel for the parties, any time consumed in obtaining the certified copy of the order, would not be excluded from said specified period of ten days

Revision petition stood disposed of in terms of agreement between the parties.

Judgment & Decree

MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.

Learned counsel for the defendants/ petitioners contends that if permitted to make amendment as proposed in the application under Order VI, Rule 17, P.P.C., which has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide impugned order, dated 5-12-2007, the petitioners shall not lead any further evidence, either oral or documentary. This offer has been accepted, by the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. In the light of above, let the petitioners file amended written statement in the trial Court within ten days from today without fail. As the order has been dictated in presence of learned counsel for the parties, therefore, any time consumed in obtaining the certified copy of this order, shall not be excluded from ten days period, otherwise, the petitioner shall not be allowed to file the amended written statement, as there is strong protest on part of the respondent's side alleging delay in the matter by the petitioners, which allegation has been denied by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

3. Be that as it may, this revision petition stands disposed of in terms of the agreement between the parties. As regards the miscellaneous applications filed by the respondent are concerned, suffice it to say that as the main revision petition is being disposed of therefore, the miscellaneous applications are also disposed of. Let the respondent agitate the matter therein, if so legally permissible, before the learned trial Court. H.B.T./N-49/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.