ADNAN ABID — Plaintiff Versus MUNAF ATTARA and others — Defendants
Court: High Court
MUHAMMAD ZABIT — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent
Court: Peshawar
SCMR
2015
----S. 55(3)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VI, R. 15---Amended election petition, verification of---Scope and principles---Appellant/runner up candidate had filed an election petition against the respondent/returned candidate challenging his qualification to contest the election---Appellant moved an application seeking amendment in the election petition so as to add two further grounds to the petition---Said application was allowed by the Election Tribunal and appellant filed the amended election petition---Respondent raised an objection before the Election Tribunal that amended election petition was not verified in terms of S.55(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1976, thus, it was liable to be dismissed---Election Tribunal dismissed the amended election petition on the basis that it was not duly verified---Contentions of appellant that the amended election petition, in fact, was part and parcel of the original election petition and was an addition thereto, thus in law the amended petition had merged in the original petition; that as the original petition was duly verified in accordance with law, therefore regardless of whether the amended petition was verified or not, the defect shall not fall within the purview of S.55(3) of Representation of the People Act, 1976; that at best the Election Tribunal could have struck out the additional grounds that were added by way of amendment in the original election petition and the original petition should have been tried and decided on its own merits---Validity---Amended election petition in the present case for all intents and purposes was a final, independent and separate document (election petition) which had to be verified per the mandate of law---Once the original election petition was replaced and substituted by the amended election petition, the earlier could not be resorted to and it was not left to the choice of the appellant to fall back on the original petition and have the two grounds deleted for the resolution of the election dispute agitated by him---Principle of merger as put forth by the appellant was neither relevant nor shall apply in the present case, rather it was the principle of substitution which shall be attracted---For the determination and resolution of issues in disputes before the court, it was the amended pleadings which shall be taken into consideration and not the former pleadings---Issues were framed on the basis of the amended pleadings, and if already so framed, shall be modified to either score off any existing issue or to add the issues arising out of the amended pleadings---Admittedly the amended election petition was neither duly verified by the appellant in terms of O.VI, R.15, C.P.C. read with S.55(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1976, nor was got attested from the Oath Commissioner--- Election Tribunal had rightly dismissed the amended election petition for not being duly verified---Appeal was dismissed accordingly.
Sardar MUHAMMAD NASEEM KHAN — Appellant Versus RETURNING OFFICER, PP-12 and others — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD
1989
Civil Revision No.69 of 1988, decided on 5th December, 1988.
ADEEB JAVEDANI, PRINTER AND PUBLISHER MOON DIGEST, LAHORE‑‑Petitioner‑Defendant Versus YAHYA BAKHTIAR‑‑Respondent‑Plaintiff
Court:
PLD
1986
Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 1985, decided on 12th May, 1986.
BIJAN MUBASHER‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court:
MLD
2000
First Appeal from Orders Nos. 15 to 25 of 2000 and 132 of 1999, decided on 7th July, 2000.
ABDUL AZIZULLAH and others‑‑‑Appellants Versus ANJUMAN ASNA ASHRIA AND HELIYAN-E‑NAH DAGH (REGD.) and others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Quetta
MUSARRAT BEGUM and 2 others — Petitioners Versus Sayed IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN GILLANI and 2 others — Respondents
Court: Peshawar
MLD
2023
2022-September-6
JEHANGIR — Petitioner Versus Mst. ANEELA and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)
PLD
1983
Civil Revision No. 44 of 1981, heard on 4th May, 1983.
Haji AYUB Petitioner Versus Mst. BACHAI AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Court:
YLR
2003
Suit No.209 of 1998, decided on 10th September, 2003.
Messrs GETCO TRADING LTD. through Local Agent‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Director‑General and 2 others‑‑‑Defendants
Court: Karachi
