Production of witnesses

2016 YLRN 67 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S.12Suit for specific performance of agreementProduction of witnessesEssentials

When an agreement was denied by defendant in written statement then plaintiff was required to produce stamp vendor with his record of register of stamp vending in order to prove purchase of stamp at specific date by specific person

In order to prove writing of agreement on specific date, petition writer was to be produced and marginal witness of agreement and plaintiff should appear himself in witness box.

2015 PLD 85 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

S. 302(b)Qatl-i-amdProduction of witnessesProsecution was not bound to produce all witnesses

Production of material and natural witnesses was sufficient.

2014 CLC 805 ELECTION-TRIBUNAL-BALOCHISTAN Judicial Precedent

Ss. 62, 63, 64, 52, 54 & 55Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XVI, Rr. 1 & 2Election petitionProcedureElection for the seat of Member of Provincial AssemblyNon-filing of list and affidavits of witnesses sought to be examined in the election petitionProduction of witnessesGood causeElection Tribunal, powers ofScope

Contention of petitioner was that list and affidavits of witnesses sought to be examined could not be filed due to their non-accessibility

Validity

Election Tribunal had the status of civil court while determining the dispute with regard to rights and liabilities of the parties in presence of their evidence

Election Tribunal did not function as a "court" nor was its action judicial

Provisions of S.62(1) of Representation of the People Act, 1976 were directory in nature as no penal consequences had been provided in the said Act for its non-compliance

Penal consequences entailing in dismissal of election petition had been provided in S.63 of Representation of the People Act, 1976

Election Tribunal should dismiss election petition if the provisions of S.54 or 55 of Representation of the People Act,1976 had not been complied with or if petitioner had failed to make further deposit as required under S.62(4) of the Act

Election Tribunal had the powers of civil court while trying a civil suit under the provisions of C.P.C.

Election petition should be decided expeditiously without being entangled in lengthy procedure

Purpose for filing of affidavits of the witnesses was that before commencement of proceedings the opposite side must be conscious, aware and should be prepared as to what kind of evidence was expected to be given so that they could make preparation for cross-examination and to prevent the concoction and fabrication of the evidence

Election Tribunal was not bound to follow the procedure as laid down in C.P.C. for trial of election petition

No witness whose name was not mentioned in the election petition should be summoned or examined unless required by the Election Tribunal

Election Tribunal had power to call a witness other than those mentioned in the list of witnesses but a party intended to produce such witnesses was required to show "good cause" and Tribunal had to record reasons while granting such permission

Parties to a lis were required to furnish list of witnesses whom they proposed to call either to give evidence or to produce documents within seven days of framing of issues

If a party failed to file list of witnesses or omitted the name of witness therein then for indulgence of the court for calling such witness, good cause had to be shown for such omission of the witness from the list of witnesses

Petitioner had failed to annex affidavits of proposed witnesses with the election petition

Names of witnesses had been mentioned in the list but same could not be termed sufficient compliance of provisions of Representation of the People Act, 1976

Petitioner had failed to show good cause within the meaning of sub-Rule 2 of O.XVI, C.P.C.

Mere assertion that witnesses were not accessible was neither sufficient to establish a good cause nor it could be termed as justified reason for summoning the proposed witnesses

Petition for summoning the witnesses was dismissed in circumstances.

2012 MLD 1984 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S.7(2)Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199Constitutional petitionSuit for recovery of maintenance allowanceProduction of witnessesPrinciples

Petitioner's application for production of witnesses after the conclusion of evidence of both parties was dismissed by Family Court on the ground that list of such witnesses was not furnished by the petitioner with the petitioner's written statement-Validity-Proviso to S.7(2) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 contemplated that the parties may, with the permission-of the court, call any witness at any later stage, if the court considered such evidence expedient in the interest of justice

Family Court in the impugned order, did not appear to have given any such observation as to whether the evidence of such witnesses was expedient to the interest of justice or not

Mere fact that the list of witnesses was not furnished along with written statement, did not place any bar for the production of any witness at any belated stage

Family Court, in exercise of its powers could make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice

Court was not to act upon the principle that every procedure was to be taken to be prohibited unless it was expressly provided for. but on the converse principle that every procedure was to be understood as permissible till it was shown to be prohibited by law

As a matter of general principle, prohibition could not be presumed

Order of Family Court was set aside with the direction that the petitioner's application for production of witnesses be deemed to be accepted

Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.