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

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 763 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. BAKHT BEGUM vs AFARIN KHAN O — 2023 CLC 763 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2023 CLC 763 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
CLC
Parties
Citation Name: 2023 CLC 763 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. BAKHT BEGUM vs AFARIN KHAN O
Subject matter
Civil

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 763 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. BAKHT BEGUM VS AFARIN KHAN O.XLI, R.27---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), Ss. 42 & 54---Suit for declaration and injunction---additional evidence, non-recording of---Concurrent findings of facts by two Courts below---Petitioner / plaintiff was aggrieved of judgments and decrees passed by Trial Court and Lower appellate Court, dismissing her suit and appeal respectively---Plea raised by petitioner / plaintiff was that Trial Court did not decide her application to produce evidence and Lower appellate Court did not allow recording of that evidence---Validity---Object of allowing parties to lead evidence at appellate stage was to enable the Court to decide controversies finally and necessities for such evidence should be felt by the Court---Parties to appeal had no right to lead additional evidence if no such request was made before Trial Court---Lower appellate Court considered almost all contentions of petitioner / plaintiff in its judgment---Simply on such ground that application remained undecided and matter could not be remanded when petitioner could not prove a case through rest of the evidence as produced by her before Trial Court---Held, High Court could not interfere in findings of fact on the ground that on reappraisal of evidence it was possible to reach a different conclusion, unless it was shown that such finding by Lower appellate Court suffered from misreading or nonreading of evidence, which had affected findings on merits---High Court declined to interfere in concurrent findings of facts by two Courts below, as petitioner / plaintiff could not point out any illegality, perversity or jurisdiction defect in judgments and decrees passed by two Courts below---Revision was dismissed in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC

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