Conceding statement

2007 YLR 2675 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S.12Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XVIII, R.16Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.130Evidence, recording out of turnProduction of evidenceOrderConceding statementOpportunity of cross-examination

During recording of evidence of plaintiff, one of the defendants made conceding statement and on the basis of such statement, suit was dismissed

Judgment and decree passed by Trial Court was set aside by Appellate Court and the stilt was decreed in favour of plaintiff

Validity

Order of Trial Court and recording out of turn statement of defendant were acts beyond the scope of O.XVIII, R.16 C.P. C.

Such order of Trial Court was a non-speaking order recording no reason or the cause to deviate from the normal and routine course of trial and same was patent mistrial of the suit

Trial Court on recording out of/ turn .statement of defendant tinder oath, did not give opportunity of cross-examination to any of the parties

Defendants had a vested right to cross-examine the defendant who made conceding statement

In absence of opportunity of cross-examination, conceding statement of the defendant had no evidentiary value and could be excluded from the record

Statement of the defendant could not have been read as evidence nor could it be dealt with on merits by arty of the subordinate courts

Trial Court could not have rejected the statement on its merits and Appellate Court was riot competent to consider and treat the same as admission' of the defendant in favour of plaintiff

Judgments and decrees passed by both the courts below were set aside and case was remanded to Trial Court for decision afresh

Revision was allowed accordingly.