SABIR HUSSAIN vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE/MCAC, Layyah art — 2025 CLC 785 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

SABIR HUSSAIN VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE/MCAC, Layyah art. 84---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S. 12---Suit for specific performance---application for comparison of signatures and/or thumb impression through expert---Scope---Plaintiff filed an application for comparison of thumb impressions of defendants on the agreement with their specimen/admitted thumb impressions, which was dismissed by the Trial Court, and revision filed against said dismissal order was also dismissed by the District Court---Ground for dismissal was that report of the finger expert is a corroborative piece of evidence and the application had been filed by the plaintiff /petitioner at belated stage just to linger on the trial ,hence, the same could not be allowed---Validity---admittedly, the suit-property was allotted by the Government to predecessor-in-interest of defendants/respondents and after demise of said predecessor-in-interest, they (defendants/respondents) were in occupation thereof---Suit was instituted by the petitioner on the basis of the agreement purportedly executed by respondents/defendants including one, who was a minor at the time of execution of the agreement---as the execution of agreement was outrightly denied by respondents, case of the petitioner depended upon proving the agreement through which the suit property had allegedly been sold by respondents to the petitioner---Object for production of evidence is assistance to the Courts to reach a just conclusion and an application for comparison of thumb impression is one such mode---Only hinderance in not allowing the application could be if the plaintiff intended to fill in the lacunae of his case after the conclusion of evidence---In the present case, the respondent side had failed to point out any such effort on part of the petitioner---There appeared to be no harm to either side if comparison of thumb impression was made---In fact, the said exercise would be appropriate and in the interest of justice to reach a fair conclusion and render a just and proper decision, even at the cost of some delay in conclusion of the trial---For a Court of law, rendering a fair and just decision is more important than to act hurriedly by drawing a wrong conclusion---Mere fact that application for comparison of thumb impression had been moved at the stage when the entire evidence has been recorded is not a cogent reason to dismiss the application---In said regard, notably, no time has been stipulated in terms of art. 84 of the of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, for filing the application for comparison of the signatures and/or thumb impression through expert---High Court set-aide the impugned orders passed by the Courts below, as a consequence, application of the petitioner for conducting comparison of the thumb impression and/or signatures of respondents, was accepted---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.

SABIR HUSSAIN vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE/MCAC, Layyah art — 2025 CLC 785 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC