PRESIDENT, ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, ISLAMABAD vs KISHWAR KHAN Substantial justice

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

PRESIDENT, ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, ISLAMABAD VS KISHWAR KHAN Substantial justice---Court, duty of---Function of the court is to do substantial justice and not to knockout or non-suit the party on technicalities. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1598 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case PRESIDENT, ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, ISLAMABAD VS KISHWAR KHAN O. VII, R. 11---Rejection of plaint---Principles---Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. enlightens and expounds rejection of plaint if it appears from the averments articulated in the plaint to be barred by any law or discloses no cause of action---Court is under obligation to give a meaningful reading to the plaint and if it is manifestly vexatious or meritless in the sense of not disclosing a clear right to sue, the court may reject the plaint---With the aim of deciding whether the plaint discloses cause of action or not, the court has to perceive and grasp the averments made in the plaint and the accompanying documents---In case of any mix question of law and facts, the right methodology and approach is to let the suit proceed to written statement and discovery and determine the matter either on framing preliminary issues or regular trial---Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. does not justify the rejection of any particular portion of the plaint or in piecemeal as the concept of partial rejection is seemingly incongruous to the said provision. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1598 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case PRESIDENT, ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, ISLAMABAD VS KISHWAR KHAN Ss. 42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, Rr. 10 & 11---Employees in a master-servant relationship---Civil suit filed by such employees against the employer---Competency---Employees of Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited (ZTBL) were penalized for violating Standing Instructions of State Bank of Pakistan---Employees filed their appeals against the penalty but they were not decided on the ground that meeting of Board of Directors could not be convened to consider the appeals---Meanwhile employees filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the penalty imposed by ZTBL---Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited (ZTBL) filed two miscellaneous applications under Order VII, Rule 10, C.P.C. and under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. for dismissal of the suit on the basis that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit as employees were governed under the rule of master and servant---Said applications were dismissed upto the High Court---Held, that ZTBL failed to point out any specific regulation which impliedly or expressly barred the jurisdiction of civil Court---Nothing had been placed on record to show whether the penalty was imposed after issuing any show cause notice and holding any regular inquiry against the employees to establish their guilt---Being in a relationship of master and servant the only course left for the employees was to file a suit for redress of their grievances---Employees had not approached the civil Court for any declaratory decree against the termination or dismissal of service or damages but were only seeking declaratory decree and injunctive relief against the imposition of penalty and its recovery from them---Issue of imposition of penalty whether rightly imposed or wrongly, or whether it was imposed after providing any opportunity of hearing to the private respondents/employees or not, or whether any regular inquiry was conducted or not to fix the responsibility, required full-fledged trial and evidence---Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited and the other defendants in the suit had already filed their written statements and obviously after providing fair opportunity of adducing evidence and hearing, the Trial Court would decide the suit on its own merits---On one hand ZTBL filed an application under Order VII, Rule 10, C.P.C. for return of plaint which means that the proceedings were attacked on the grounds that the Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit but on the other hand, another application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. was moved for the rejection of the plaint---No justification was placed before the court of moving two applications simultaneously having different rudiments in C.P.C. but the grounds in both applications were absolutely alike---Civil petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1598 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case PRESIDENT, ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, ISLAMABAD VS KISHWAR KHAN O. VII, R. 11---Return of plaint---Principles---Order VII, Rule 10, C.P.C. provides that the plaint shall at any stage of the suit be returned to be presented to the Court in which the suit should have been instituted---If the Court is of the opinion that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, it is not open to that Court to dismiss the suit on that account, but the Court is required to proceed under Order VII, Rule 10, C.P.C. directing that the plaint should be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to the proper Court and on returning a plaint, the Judge must endorse the date of its presentation and return, the name of the party presenting it, with a brief statement of the reasons for returning it. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1598 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case PRESIDENT, ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, ISLAMABAD VS KISHWAR KHAN Relationship of master and servant and remedies available to a servant in case of dismissal from employment, explained. Head NotesCase Description

PRESIDENT, ZARAI TARAQIATI BANK LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, ISLAMABAD vs KISHWAR KHAN Substantial justice — 2022 SCMR 1598 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR