1998 PLP 1839 (CLC)
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OPF N.‑W.F.P., EDUCATION DEPARTMENT‑‑‑‑Appellant Versus SHER AMAN‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 1839 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J |
| Parties | SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OPF N.‑W.F.P., EDUCATION DEPARTMENT‑‑‑‑Appellant Versus SHER AMAN‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 1839 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 1839 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 1839 (CLC) (SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OPF N.‑W.F.P., EDUCATION DEPARTMENT‑‑‑‑Appellant Versus SHER AMAN‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khawaja Azhar Rasheed, Asstt. A.‑G. for ?Appellant Adam Khan for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 20th April, 1998.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑OXLI, Rr. 23, 33 read with OXLII, R.1 & S.100‑‑‑Second appeal‑‑ Remand‑‑‑Appellate Court below not only had failed to apply its judicial mind, but also had failed to discuss the facts of the case and to give reasons for its conclusion‑‑‑Judgment of Appellate Court below which was not only arbitrary but was also perverse, was set aside and case was remanded back with directions to hear the parties and decide appeal on merits by writing a speaking order.
Judgment & Decree
Khawaja Azhar Rasheed, Asstt. A.‑G. for ?Appellant Adam Khan for Respondent. Date of hearing: 20th April, 1998. Khawaja Azhar Rashid, learned Assistant Advocate‑General for the appellant/Government and Mr. Adam Khan, Advocate learned counsel for the respondent present and heard. Record of the case perused carefully.
2. The operative part of the impugned order‑ recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge‑II, Mardan, (Mr. Ziauddin Siddiqui). reads us under:‑‑ "After restoration of appeal, again the Case was called but nobody turned up. In the original appeal too, the; respondents are proceeded against ex parte. Appeal in hand is accepted impugned Judgment and decree is set aside and suit of the plaintiff is decreed in his favour as prayed for this order may be treated as order on merits. File be consigned."
3. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General appearing on behalf of the appellant vehemently attacked the manner in which the appeal was accepted and the judgment recorded by the Additional District Judge. He submits that the impugned order is not at all a speaking order and that it does not indicate that the lower Court had applied its mind while deciding; the case/appeal.
4. A perusal of the impugned judgment would show non‑application of judicial mind by the Additional District Judge. He has failed to discuss the facts of the case and to give reasons for his conclusion. Resultantly, the impugned judgment is not only arbitrary but is also perverse. This appeal is, therefore, accepted, the judgment/decree of the Additional District Judge is set aside and the case is remanded back to him with the directions to hear the parties and decide the appeal on merits by writing a speaking order.
5. Since the matter is pending, disposal since long, therefore, the parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Mardan on 2‑5‑1998. The District Judge is directed to dispose of the appeal on or before 2‑7‑1998 positively under intimation to the Registrar of this Court. H.B.T./84/P Appeal accepted,