2004 PLP 2258 (YLR)
NISAR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus IMTIAZ ALI and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2004 PLP 2258 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Saqib Nisar, J |
| Parties | NISAR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus IMTIAZ ALI and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 2258 (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 2004 PLP 2258 (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: 2004 PLP 2258 (YLR) (NISAR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus IMTIAZ ALI and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Agha Syed Najamul Hassan Zaidi for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
O. VI, R.17 & O.VII, R.2 & O.VIII, R.7
Set off
Defendant contested suit on ground that claim of plaintiffs was barred by time and defendant also sought set off
Plaintiffs filed application seeking amendment of plaint to the extent of correcting number of one of the properties and also that Plaintiff be permitted to seek rendition of account--Said application was allowed by Trial Court and defendant had filed revision against order of Trial Court in which he had contended that as plaintiffs had sought recovery of specific amount in the plaint, by seeking amendment in plaint the nature of suit from that of recovery to rendition of accounts, would stand changed
Plaintiffs were seeking recovery of whatever amount was due to them from defendant on account of rent proceeds of two properties
To determine what amount of rent had been fetched from properties as rent and what was the entitlement of each share-holder, the. Court had to take and ascertain the true accounts
That was so particularly in the light of the claim of set off, set up by defendant
If Court, after taking the accounts, passed a decree, that would conclusively resolve the controversy between the parties
Simply by seeking the relief of rendition of accounts, nature of cause of action, set up in plaint would be changed. Mst. Imam Hussain v. Sher Shah and others 1994 SCMR 2293 Muhammad Mian v. Syed Shamiullah and 2 others 1995 SCMR 69 ref. Ch. Muhammad Rafiq Iqbal Petitioner.
Judgment & Decree
Respondents, filed a suit recovery amounting to Rs.9,29,309.91 against the petitioner, as their share out of the rent proceeds of the two Proper bearing Nos.P-72 and P.146; the petitioner contested the suit, taking up the legal plea that the claim is barred by time, and also sought set off to the tune of Rs. 19,43,749.98. In the light of the above, the respondents moved an application seeking amendment of the plaint to die extent of correcting number of one of the properties, and also that the petitioner, permitted to seek rendition of account is a well. This application has been allowed by the learned trial Court, vide order dated 3-11-1998, hence this revision petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petition by relying upon Mst. Imam Hussain v. She-Ali Shah and others 1994 SCMR 2293 at Muhammad Mian v. Syed Shamiullah at: others 1995 SCMR 69, states that as respondents had sought the recovery of specific amount in the plaint, therefore, by seeking the amendment in the plaint, the e of the suit from that of recovery to rendition of accounts, shall stand changed.
3. I am afraid, this contention has no force. In substance, the respondents are seeking recovery of whatever amount is due them from the petitioner on account of rent proceeds of the two properties. Obviously, to determine what amount of has been fetched by the properties as and what is the entitlement of each -holder, the, Court has to take and ascertain the true accounts. This is so particularly in the light of the claim of set, set up by the petitioner in his written statement; however, without dilating much the validity of this claim of the respondents, if the Court after taking the accounts passes a decree that shall conclusively resolve the controversy between the parties. Therefore, simply by king the relief of the rendition of accounts, the nature of the cause of action, Set out in the plaint, would not be changed. Resultantly, this revision petition has no force and is hereby dismissed. H.B.T./N-51/L Revision petition dismissed.