MUHAMMAD NOMAN vs MUHAMMAD ARIF O — 2024 PLD 476 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

MUHAMMAD NOMAN VS MUHAMMAD ARIF O. XXXVII, R.3(2)---Suit for recovery---Discretionary power of the Trial Court to grant leave to defend application conditionally or unconditionally---Scope--- Power of Appellate Court to interfere with Trial Court's discretionary decisions---Scope---Plea that criterion for grant of leave to defend is the plausibility of defence, but not the credibility of defence---Validity---Under O. XXXVII, R.3(2), C.P.C. Trial Court has been vested with reasonable discretion to grant leave conditionally or unconditionally on terms it deems suitable in the circumstances of each case so long as such a discretion is exercised reasonably without being illegal, arbitrary, capricious or fanciful---Grant of conditional or unconditional leave is linked to the plausibility of the defence and ultimate success or failure in the suit is not the consideration for the refusal or grant of leave, instead, the focus should be on the fact that whether the grounds stated in the application for permission to defend the suit are plausible, and if the defendant has an arguable case---There is no rule that if the defence is credible the defendant must be granted unconditional leave---If the credibility of the defence is sufficient grounds for granting leave to defend the suit, it does not guarantee or entitle a defendant to unconditional leave---Where the statute itself confers upon the Court unrestricted discretionary powers, it would be inappropriate to establish or specify a general or standard guideline (i.e. to lay down a rule of thumb) for the exercise of such powers---Appellate court generally refrains from interfering with the exercise of discretion by the Trial Court (or will not substitute its own discretion for that of the Trial Court) unless it is shown to have been based on irrelevant or extraneous considerations, or exercised arbitrarily, whimsically or perversely---Exercise of discretion by the Trial Court in passing the initial order conditionally granting leave to defend was free from any material defect and the defence presented in the leave to defend application did not warrant intervention by the Appellate Court or compel to overturn the Trial Court's decision---First appeal was dismissed accordingly.

MUHAMMAD NOMAN vs MUHAMMAD ARIF O — 2024 PLD 476 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD