IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI vs Main MUHAMMAD SHAHBAZ SHARIF O — 2023 SCMR 636 SUPREME-COURT

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

IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS Main MUHAMMAD SHAHBAZ SHARIF O. XI, Rr. 7 & 21---Defamation Ordinance (LVI of 2002) S. 14---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 10A---Defamation---Suit for damages---Contumacious conduct of defendant---Defendant failing to comply with order to answer interrogatories and prolonging the proceedings---Effect---Striking out of the right of defence---[Per Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, J. (Majority view): Proceedings of the case were prolonged by the petitioner (defendant) at every stage of the case in the Trial Court to delay the decision of the case---During proceedings for delivering and answering the interrogatories by the parties under Order XI, C.P.C., the petitioner showed the same delaying tactics by which he had been hindering the progress of the suit earlier---Trial Court had provided the petitioner with more than sufficient opportunities to submit his answers to the interrogatories of the respondent, before taking the penal action under Rule 21 of Order XI, C.P.C.---Conduct of the petitioner had remained willfully contumacious and disobedient throughout the proceedings of the case in the Trial Court---Trial Court had not committed any illegality or material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdiction by dismissing the objections (application) of the petitioner for rejection of the interrogatories of the respondent and directing him to submit the answers to those interrogatories and subsequently by striking out the right of defence of the petitioner due to non-submission of the answers to the said interrogatories]---[Per Ayesha A. Malik, J. (Minority view): In the present case the order of the Trial Court whereby the right of the petitioner's defence was struck out, the facts of the case did not establish that the petitioner committed willful default or intentionally and deliberately disobeyed an order of the Court---Effect of striking out the defence was that it deprived the party of its ability to defend itself in the case which was a serious matter---In the present case the Court had other alternatives, at its disposal, to regulate the pace of the proceedings as well as the conduct of the petitioner, one of which was to impose costs which would not only serve as a form of deterrence but would also lay the foundation for expeditious justice---Trial Court proceeded in a mechanical manner with the case, and granted numerous adjournments without so much as imposing cost so as to discourage the same---Order by which the right of defence of the petitioner was struck out, did not state that it was based on the history of the case or the overall conduct of the petitioner in the case---Petitioner's recent public shooting and injury at a political rally justified the grant of an adjournment for a reasonable time under the circumstances---Right to defence could not be struck out without considering all relevant factors---Impugned order of the Trial Court, whereby right of defence of petitioner was struck out, was set aside, and the case was remanded to the Trial Court to grant reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to file answers to the interrogatories and thereafter to proceed with the case in accordance with law]

IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI vs Main MUHAMMAD SHAHBAZ SHARIF O — 2023 SCMR 636 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 SCMR