PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

AKHTAR MUHAMMAD vs QUETTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY O — 2021 CLC 798 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2021 CLC 798 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2021
Reporter
CLC
Parties
AKHTAR MUHAMMAD vs QUETTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY O
Subject matter
Criminal

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

AKHTAR MUHAMMAD VS QUETTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY O.XIII, Rr. 1, 2, O. XVI, Rr. 1 & 2---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), Ss. 12, 39, 42 & 54--- additional documents, production of--- Principle--- Concurrent findings of facts by two Courts below--- In suit for specific performance of agreement, cancellation of documents, declaration and injunction, plaintiffs/petitioners sought filing of some additional documents but the application was dismissed concurrently by Trial Court as well as Lower appellate Court--- Plea raised by plaintiffs/petitioners was that earlier the documents were not in their possession--- Validity--- all documents relied upon, were to be produced under O.XIII, R.1, C.P.C., at the time of first hearing along with plaint--- Object was to prevent possibility of producing suspicious or forged documents by parties at later stage of proceedings--- Parties were required to produce their documents at the earlier stage so that opposite parties should know what documents were being relied upon--- High Court declined to exercise discretion in favour of plaintiffs/petitioners to permit them to produce documents, as their plea regarding possession of documents was not based on sound or cogent reasons--- Plaintiffs/petitioners were to satisfy Courts below to exercise discretion in their favour and did not give reference of the documents in their plaint nor any of the witness and attorney stated anything about the documents--- Courts below concurrently refused to exercise their discretion in favour of plaintiff/petitioners, who failed to point out any illegality or irregularity in orders--- High Court in exercise of extraordinary Constitutional jurisdiction declined to interfere in the orders passed by two Courts below which were well reasoned and according to law--- Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2021 CLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English