1989SCMR107 (PLP)
LAHORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Petitioner Versus Messrs AWAN CONTRACTORS and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989SCMR107 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jars, JJ |
| Parties | LAHORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Petitioner Versus Messrs AWAN CONTRACTORS and others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989SCMR107 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989SCMR107 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jars, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989SCMR107 (PLP) (LAHORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Petitioner Versus Messrs AWAN CONTRACTORS and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- MA. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent (in Civil Petition No. 5 of 1982).
- Date of hearing: 7th June, 1988.
- S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- MA. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent (in Civil Petition No. 5 of 1982).
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the Judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 4-11-1981 in Civil Revisions Nos. 2012/13/1980 to 2021/13/1980). Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
O.VIII, R.10--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Failure to present written statement when required by Court--Effect of--Question whether plaintiff's suit could have been decreed under O.VIII, R. 10, C.P.C. without recording any evidence, having already been dealt with in an earlier case, Supreme Court wanted to examine other related questions with reference to nature of penalty and conditions necessary for "requiring" a defendant to file written statement as also nature of discretion exercised by Court, but could not do so for want of proper assistance from Counsel and relevant record of case--Petition dismissed. Mst. Hakumat Bibi v. Imam Din PLD 1987 SC 22 ref.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought in these petitions by the Lahore Municipal Corporation against the dismissal of its Civil Revisions by the High Court. The matter was decided in favour of the respondents‑plaintiffs by the application of a rule of penalty‑‑Order VIII, rule 10, C.P.C. on the failure of the petitioner to file written statement when required by the Court to do so. When these petitions were filed, there was no authoritative pronouncement of this Court regarding interpretation of the said penal provision. A recent judgment of this Court in the case of must. Hakumat Bibi v. Imam Din (PLD 1987 SC 22), was dealt with its import. We still wanted to examine various vital questions with reference to the nature of the penalty, and the conditions necessary for "requiring" a defendant to file a written statement as also the nature of discretion exercised in this case against the petitioner. But we could not do so because the learned counsel stated that there is no material with him or with the petitioner to assist the Court on A these questions; so much so that even the copy of order sheet cannot be made available. It appears that much amount is not involved in these petitions. The petitioner and its functionaries have not cared to assist the learned counsel for the preparation of the case. There is no alternative but to dismiss these petitions / accordingly. M.I./L‑17/S Petitions dismissed.