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

PESCO through Chief Executive vs Mst — 2025 CLC 1930 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2025 CLC 1930 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
CLC
Parties
PESCO through Chief Executive vs Mst
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 115; Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

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

PESCO through Chief Executive VS Mst. HALEEMA BIBI Ss. 42 & 54---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 117 & 120---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 115, O. XXIX, R. 1 & O. XLI, R. 1---Suit for declaration and injunction---Maintainability---Locus standi to file revision application---Illegal use of electricity---Proof---Onus to prove---Respondent / plaintiff assailed excessive bill of electricity issued by petitioner / Peshawar Electric Supply Company---Suit and appeal were concurrently decided against petitioner / Company---Validity---Signatory of Vakalatnama was not competent to file civil revision on behalf of petitioner / Company---Memorandum of appeal was not signed by Chief Executive or legally authorized person and this was against the mandate of O. XXIX, R. 1, C.P.C.---In a suit by or against corporation any pleading could be signed and verified on behalf of corporation by Secretary or Director or other principal officer of the corporation, who was liable to depose to the facts of the case---Memorandum of appeal could be signed as per O. XLI, R. 1, C.P.C. by appellant or his pleader, and a Revision Petition could also be signed by petitioner or its pleader as revisional jurisdiction was a part of general appellate jurisdiction of superior Courts---As a beneficiary, the petitioner / Company was required to prove allegation of illegal use of electricity and genuineness of assessments so imposed on respondent / plaintiff but no evidence was brought on record---Electricity meter of respondent / plaintiff was defective and she had applied for its replacement which was not replaced---High Court declined to interfere in judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below, as there was no illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC

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