Non-production of evidence
Non-production of evidence legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Plaintiff was bound to prove that disputed mutation as well as order of Assistant Commissioner were void ab initio and ineffective upon his right
No evidence was produced from either side in the present case
Plaintiff would have to suffer if no evidence had been recorded in the case
Initial onus was on the plaintiff to prove his case positively which he badly failed to discharge his duty
Onus would shift upon the beneficiary to prove the original transaction as well as execution of document after deposition of plaintiff on oath that disputed transaction or instrument was based on fraud or mala fide
Question of disproof or rebuttal would arise only when plaintiff by production of evidence had established his case
Defendants were not required to lead any evidence when plaintiff had failed to prove his case
When both the parties were equally at fault, plaintiff should suffer
Whoever desired any court to give a judgment as to any right dependent on the existence of fact had to prove the fact as existing
Plaintiff had to prove his claim first by production of affirmative evidence and then court would require the defendant to prove his stance
Party approaching the court to get relief had to stand on its own legs and any weakness in the case of other side would neither prove his case nor said party would be entitled to get any relief on that basis
No illegality or material irregularity had been pointed out
Revision was dismissed in circumstances.
"Non-production of evidence", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124958533
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Non-production of evidence"
2012 Y L R 2658
MUHAMMAD JAMIL and others — Petitioners Versus Mst. INAYAT BEGUM — Respondent
Court: Lahore2016 C L C Note 65
MUHAMMAD ASLAM BUTT — Appellant Versus Mst. KHALIDA PARVEEN and 3 others — Respondents
Court: Lahore2005 C L C 383
MUZAMMAL ABDULLAH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Lahore1982 P Cr
KARIM BAKHSH ETC.-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent
Court: Lahore2012 C L C 1729
Mian AURANGZEB NOOR — Petitioner Versus RENT CONTROLLER, LAHORE and another — Respondents
Court: Lahore2023 C L D 1131
NIB BANK LIMITED — Appellant Versus Messrs PASBAN AGRO CHEMICALS COMPANY and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore (Bahawalpur Bench)1993 P Cr
MANSHA MASIH — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Court: Federal Shariat Court1998CLC333
MUHAMMAD BASHIR ‑‑‑ Appellant Versus Mst. IQ13AL BEGUM and another‑‑‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑‑O‑XVII, R. 3‑‑‑Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S. 42‑‑‑Dismissal of suit for non‑production of evidence in terms of O.XVII, R. 3, C.P.C.‑‑‑First Appellate Court while accepting appeal, remanded case to Trial Court‑‑‑High Court in second appeal set aside order of First Appellate Court and restored that of Trial Court‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Plaintiff claimed that on two occasions his witnesses were present but their evidence could not be recorded due to absence of defendant's counsel‑‑‑Plaintiff, however, was provided further opportunities on three occasions, thereafter; last one being on payment of costs‑‑‑Trial Court in its order had recorded that plaintiff was being provided "last and final" opportunity and no further adjournment would be given to him‑‑‑Plaintiff, despite such order neither paid costs nor produced witnesses‑‑‑Counsel for plaintiff had not prayed that proceedings in suit might be kept pending till closing hours of Court‑‑‑Trial Court thus, had rightly dismissed plaintiff's suit for non‑production of evidence in terms of O.XVII, R.3, C.P.C.‑‑‑Evidence.2010 Y L R 1755
IMTIAZ ALI through General Attorney — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD BAKHSH and 2 others — Respondents
Court: LahoreP L D 2003 Peshawar 60
Mian GUL SHAHZAD AMAN ROOM and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus KAMEEN‑MIAN and others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: