2009 PLP 219 (CLC)

MUZAFFAR ALI, J.

This 1st appeal assails the decree, dated 12-9-2001 passed by learned Civil Judge, Skardu, whereby the learned lower Court has dismissed the suit of plaintiff as time-barred. The respondent also has impugned the above decree through filing cross-objection to the extent of dismissing the set off claimed by the respondent in his written statement, filed before the learned Civil Judge, Skardu, hence this Court proposes to dispose of both the appeal as well as the cross-objections through this single judgment. The gist of the dispute between the parties, gathered from the pleadings are that, the plaintiff and the defendant jointly obtained contracts and also entered into monetary transaction with each other. Resultantly they had to face controversies of claims and counter-claims of outstanding towards each other. Initially the parties tried to solve the issue by Arbitrators chosen by them, but failed. Eventually the plaintiff filed the suit before Court of law for recovery of 5,27,325 suit money and the defendant also filed set off of Rs.6,15,

744. The learned Civil Judge framed issues in light of pleadings which the parties tried to prove and rebut through oral and documentary evidence. The trial Court finally concluded that the suit of the plaintiff is liable to be dismissed as time-barred, while he dismissed the set off filed by defendant meritless, hence this appeal before this Court. We have heard the counsel for the parties and also gone through the record of the case. The pleadings and the perusal of impugned judgment, pertaining to the facts of the case clearly transpires that the learned trial Court has failed to frame proper issues in the case. The various controversies between the parties laid down in their pleadings have been overlooked and issues have not been framed to determine the real controversy between the parties. Thereby the learned lower Court has not complied with the Order XIV, rule 1, sub-rule (5) of C.P.C., which is mandatory in its nature and the same is reproduced as under:

"At the first hearing of the suit the Court shall, after reading the plaint and the written statements, if any, and after such examination of the parties as may appear necessary, ascertain upon what material propositions of fact or of law the parties are at variance, and shall thereupon proceed to frame and record the issues on which the right decision of the case appears to depend." At the end we deem it proper to warn and direct all the Civil Judges (Trial Courts) to go through the above provision of laws fully and diligently while framing the issues as the framing of issues is most important stage and any negligence or over-sighting of real controversies, between the parties at this stage might cause suffering of parties from inordinate delays and also causes monetory losses to the litigant public. Resultantly the public losses the confidence over the Court of law, hence this Court intimates the lower judiciary in the area to be conscious in future otherwise, such negligence would be taken very seriously against them. The result of the above discussion is that the impugned decree passed by the learned lower Court is set aside by accepting the appeal and cross-objections and the case is remanded back to the trial Court to frame proper issues after revisiting into the pleadings .concisely and adjudicate the matter afresh. Parties to bear their own costs. H.B.T./22/Glt. Case remanded.