MUHAMMAD ARIF vs AZIZ-UR-REHMAN O — 2023 CLC 713 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

MUHAMMAD ARIF VS AZIZ-UR-REHMAN O.VII, R. 14 & O.XIII, Rr. 1, 2, 3, 4---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.78 & 85(3)---Power of court to receive documentary evidence at subsequent stage---Scope and principle---De-exhibiting of document---If a party relied upon a document, he should have filed the documents with the plaint, and if he relied upon on any other documents, whether or not in his possession or power, as evidence in support of his claim then such documents were required to be entered in a list to be added or annexed to the plaint as provided in R.14 of O.VII of the C.P.C---Otherwise party should have produced all the documentary evidence of every description in his possession or power at the first hearing of the suit on which he intended to rely as required under O.XIII, R.1 of the C.P.C---As far as non-filing of documents along with the plaint or at the first hearing of the suit, it had never been considered fatal in view of provision of the O.XIII, R.2 of the C.P.C which empowered the Court to receive documentary evidence at subsequent stage of trial---No documentary evidence in possession or powers of any party which could have been but had not been produced in accordance with the requirements of R.1 of O.XIII of the C.P.C could be received at any stage of the proceedings unless good cause was shown to the satisfaction of the Court for non- production thereof and the Court receiving any such evidence could record the reasons for doing so---Object of O.XIII R.2 of the C.P.C was not to penalize the parties for not producing the documents in time but to provide opportunity to produce evidence which party for some good cause could not produce well within time---Evidence could not be shut-out to exclude the documents generally except where they were apparently suspicious, forged or fabricated , so as to prevent the fraud---Two relevant stages relating to bringing the documents on record were; first stage was to produce or file a document at the time of filing of the plaint and the second when it was tendered in evidence---Discretion was, therefore, vested in the Trial Court to extend the time for producing documents even after the first hearing; there was also no requirement for filing a formal application so as to seek leave of the Court in order to produce a document---Expression of de-exhibit was not defined nor mentioned in the C.P.C, although R.3 of O.XIII of the C.P.C empowered the Court that it could reject irrelevant or inadmissible documents but it was not the intention of legislation to remove the documents from the record after they had been received and marked as exhibit---Party filing the document was entitled to receive it back as provided under O.XIII, R.4, C.P.C.---Provision of O.XIII, R.4 of the C.P.C was mandatory and if not complied with, the document could not be considered in evidence.

MUHAMMAD ARIF vs AZIZ-UR-REHMAN O — 2023 CLC 713 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC