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

CHANGAZ KHAN vs MIAN KHAN O — 2022 CLC 1966 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2022 CLC 1966 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
CLC
Parties
CHANGAZ KHAN vs MIAN KHAN O
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
Civil Procedure Code

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

CHANGAZ KHAN VS MIAN KHAN O.XVII, Rr. 2 & 3---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.10A---Suit for pre-emption, declaration, temporary and permanent injunction---Petitioner/plaintiff contended that his right to produce evidence was closed by trial Court; that provisions of O.XVII, R.3 of the Civil Procedure Code were discretionary and not mandatory; that no opportunity to produce evidence was granted to him; that technicalities must not come in the way of substantial justice; and that non-production of witnesses was not intentional as they were out of town---Validity---Trial Court ought to have offered the petitioner an opportunity to testify before the Court while closing his right to adduce remaining evidence which legal obligation had not been fulfilled by not affording such opportunity before closing his evidence---Petitioner had been deprived of his fundamental right of making statement to prove the contents of his case---Trial Court proceeded to decide the case without having any material before it and had acted in its jurisdiction illegally/with material illegality---Nothing in the record shown in the impugned order of Trial Court that matter was adjourned on the previous date of hearing on the request of the petitioner as the Court did not observe that it was the last chance for recording evidence of the petitioner/plaintiff---Valuable right of the petitioner was involved in the suit which could not be allowed to be defeated in law on mere technical point as courts were to avoid technicalities in deciding disputes between the parties and adhere to the merits of the case---Revision petition was accepted and Trial Court was directed to re-adjudicate the matter by granting two opportunities to the petitioner to produce his complete evidence subject to payment of the cost of Rs.30,000/- to the respondent/defendants. Head NotesCase Description

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLC

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