Citation Name: 2023 PLD 56 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case BIBI AYESHA vs MUHAMMAD AKBAR S

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

Citation Name: 2023 PLD 56 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case BIBI AYESHA VS MUHAMMAD AKBAR S. 115, O. XVII, Rr. 2, 3 & O. IX, Rr. 8, 9---Party fails to appear on the day fixed---Reviosional jurisdiction---Scope---Suit of the petitioner was dismissed concurrently by the Trial Court as well as by the Appellate Court under O. XVII, R. 3 of C.P.C.---Validity---Trial Court adjourned the case for submission of list of witnesses, however, the petitioner failed to submit his list of witnesses on several dates---No material was available before the Trial Court for decision of the suit on merits, hence resort to O. XVII, R. 3 of C.P.C. by the Trial Court was not warranted---Trial Court at the most could either adjourn the suit or dismiss it for non-prosecution---Impugned order was not decision on merits for want of evidence---Impugned order passed by the Trial Court fell in the category of O. XVII, R. 2 read with O. IX, R. 8 of C.P.C.---Substance of an order/judgment was to be looked into and not its format---Such an order could be re-called under O. IX, R 9 read with O. XLVII, R. 1 of C.P.C.---Appellate Court had illegally exercised appellate jurisdiction as the order of the Trial Court was not an appealable order----Revision in exceptional circumstance may lie against an order which may fall in the category of O. IX, R. 8 of C.P.C.---Impugned order passed by the Trial Court was converted into an order under O. XVII, R. 2 C.P.C. with the direction that petitioner was at liberty to apply to the Trial Court for restoration of his suit under O. IX, R. 9 read with O. XLVII, R. 1 and S. 151, C.P.C.---High Court further observed and directed that as the date set for filing of list of witnesses was not a date of "hearing" as such, the impugned dismissal order of the Trial Court was a void order---Impugned judgment and decree passed by the Appellate Court was set aside---Appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Appellate Court stood dismissed, being not against an appealable order---Impugned order and decree passed by the Trial Court was converted into an order under O. IX, R. 8 read with O. XVII, R. 2 of C.P.C.---Revision petition was partly allowed.

Citation Name: 2023 PLD 56 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case BIBI AYESHA vs MUHAMMAD AKBAR S — 2023 PLD 56 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD