ASIF ULLAH vs Mst — 2025 CLC 1652 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

ASIF ULLAH VS Mst. GULZARA BIBI Delaying tactics---Abuse of process of law---Remedy---Court of law can counter deliberate attempts for prolonging delays and causing abuse of process of a Court, in two ways; first to avoid unnecessary and undue leniency in the matter of setting aside those orders where the Court reaches a conclusion that the other party has deliberately absented themselves or defaulted in performance of some activities, required for further progress of suit, without any reasonable cause; secondly, when the Court is of the opinion that a party has defaulted in its duty vis-a-viz progress of suit but the Court considers that interest of justice would be served by affording further chances, then the Court should levy cost which should be sufficient for fully compensating the other party for the time and money spent by it in procuring legal assistance as well as the inconvenience caused to it due to delay in the proceedings---Imposing proper and reasonable amount of cost in such cases would not only ensure justice to affected parties but would also be working as deterrence for the party, which deliberately and maliciously employ delaying tactics, which causes undue delay in litigation---Genuine cases where a party is prevented by sufficient cause in attending to a step in litigation should however be treated differently and in such cases lenient approach should be adopted. Citation Name: 2025 CLC 1652 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case ASIF ULLAH VS Mst. GULZARA BIBI S. 4---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 115 & O.IX, R. 13---Suit for partition of dwelling house---Ex-parte decree, maintaining of---Suit was filed by respondent / plaintiff seeking partition of dwelling housing to the extent of her share---Suit was decreed ex-parte and application filed by petitioners / defendants was dismissed concurrently---Validity---Ex-parte decree could not be treated as void---Respondent / plaintiff in ex-parte decree was relying on registered deed in favour of predecessor-in-interest from whom she had been claiming accrual of right by inheritance---In written statement petitioners / defendants had relied on purchase of rights in immovable property through unregistered deed and the unregistered deed could not be proved as the petitioners / defendants did not produce any evidence in support thereof before Trial Court---Respondent / plaintiff through ex-parte evidence of had sufficiently established the case in her favour---There was no rebuttal, therefore, judgment and decree was fully justified on the basis of ex-parte evidence present before Trial Court---High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction declined to interfere in the orders passed by two Courts below---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

ASIF ULLAH vs Mst — 2025 CLC 1652 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC