2013 PLP 503 (YLR)
ZULQARNAIN — Petitioner Versus SNGPL through General Manager and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2013 PLP 503 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ch. Muhammad Tariq, J |
| Parties | ZULQARNAIN — Petitioner Versus SNGPL through General Manager and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2013 PLP 503 (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 2013 PLP 503 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ch. Muhammad Tariq, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2013 PLP 503 (YLR) (ZULQARNAIN — Petitioner Versus SNGPL through General Manager and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nadeem Shibli for Petitioner.
- Umer Sharif for Respondent No.1.
Headnotes / Summary
O.XLIII, R. 3
Appeal of petitioner was dismissed by Appellate Court on the ground that the petitioner did not issue notices to the respondent before the filing of the appeal and hence, had not complied with provisions of O.XLIII, R.3, C.P.C.
Perusal of record revealed that petitioner had served the respondent with legal notice that was sent through post and postal receipts duly certified by the Post Master were annexed with the civil revision
Contention of petitioner stood proved, in the light of such documents
High Court set aside the order of Appellate Court and case was remanded to the Trial Court for decision on merits
Revision was accepted accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
CH. MUHAMMAD TARIQ, J.
The petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 9-6-2010 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Faisalabad, on the ground that the learned first appellate court has dismissed the appeal on technical ground holding therein that the petitioner has not complied with the mandatory provisions of law and while filing appeal has not annexed the copy of notice and postal receipts as required under Order XLIII, Rule 3 of C.P.C.
2. Learned counsel has annexed with this file the copy of notice as well as copies of postal receipts and has contended that the learned first appellate court has ignored these documents and has passed the impugned order on the basis of technicalities which is not sustainable in the eyes of law because the petitioner while filing the appeal has observed all the formalities laid down under Order XLIII, Rule 3, C.P.C. Therefore, the case be remanded back to the learned first appellate court for deciding it on merit.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed this civil revision.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. The operative part of the impugned order is re-produced as under:-- "The perusal of file reveals that the appellant has not issued notices to the respondent before filing of appeal, hence, he has not complied with the provisions of Order XLIII, Rule 3 of C.P.C. In view of above, the instant appeal is hereby dismissed. The learned trial Court be informed. File be consigned to the record room after completion."
6. Perusal of record reveals that the petitioner served the respondent No.1 with legal notice which was sent through post. The postal receipts duly certified by the Post Master, Faisalabad City, are also annexed with this civil revision as Annexure-F/1.
7. In the light of these documents, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is proved. The instant civil revision is accepted, impugned order dated 9-6-2010 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Faisalabad, is set aside and the case is remanded back to the learned District Judge, Faisalabad, for deciding it on merit. KMZ/Z-17/L Order accordingly.