Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1453 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE O — 2023 CLC 1453 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation: 2023 CLC 1453 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court: Lahore High Court
Year: 2023
Reporter: CLC
Parties: Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1453 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE O
Subject matter: Criminal
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

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1453 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE O.VIII, Rr.1, 1a, 10---Right to file written-statement, striking off---Powers of the Court---Scope---Right of the petitioners /defendants to file written-statement was closed by the Trial Court---appellate Court maintained the said order---Held, that the Rr. 1 & 1a of O.XIII, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 ('C.P.C., 1908') manifested that the period of thirty (30) days and not more than two opportunities had been provided to a defendant to file written-statement---Consequences of failure to present the written-statement within the time fixed by the Code were provided in R.10 of O. XIII, of the C.P.C., 1908 in terms of empowering the Court to pronounce judgment against him or making such order in relation to the suit as it thinking fit---Record revealed that petitioners/defendants, after their first appearance before the Court, availed ten opportunities spanning over eight months in submitting their written-statement without showing any just and sufficient cause, therefore, their indolence/negligence was patent---Court, in the present case, could even proceed to pronounce the judgment while treating the contents of the plaint in terms of R. 1a of O. XIII, C.P.C., 1908, however, the Court only struck off the right of the petitioners/defendants to file written-statement---Petitioners / defendants still had a right to cross-examine the witnesses and impugned order by all means was less penal than the pronouncement of judgment against them---No interference by the High Court was made in the orders and judgments passed by both the Courts below---Constitutional petition was dismissed in limine.

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC

2023 CLC 1510 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANHAFEEZULLAH VS Dr. MUNIR AHMED Gift---Oral gift---Gift in favour of minor---Scope---Gift in favour of minor is not invalid if physical posse…
2023 CLC 685 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANSHAHEEN ALAM VS Mst. BIBI SALMA (Widow) S.278---Petition for letters of administration---Scope---Administration suit in view of the Successi…
2023 CLC 1008 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMst. BASHIRA BIBI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence S.1---Recovery of damages---Vicarious liability---Employe…
2023 CLC 1008 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMst. BASHIRA BIBI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence Civil liability---Acquittal in criminal case---Effect---E…
2023 CLC 1721 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANMUHAMMAD SAEED VS The CHAIRMAN, BALOCHISTAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION S. 114 & O. XLVII, R. 1---Review---Scope---Courts are vested with the…
2023 CLC 1721 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANMUHAMMAD SAEED VS The CHAIRMAN, BALOCHISTAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION art.199---Constitutional jurisdiction---Factual controversy---Scope---…

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