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

Case information

Citation: 2025 CLC 785 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court: Lahore High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: CLC
Parties: SABIR HUSSAIN vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE/MCAC, Layyah art
Subject matter: Civil
Provisions referred to: S. 12---S

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

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 was 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---Had the petitioner failed to seek comparison of signature, through expert evidence, in the face of express and outright denial as to the execution of the agreement, the same might propel the Trial Court and also the higher forums to harbour adverse inference against the petitioner/plaintiff---Therefore, non-acceptance of the application of comparison of thumb impression would lead to miscarriage of justice and thwart the Trial Court in reaching a just conclusion, which is not permissible under the law and will defeat ends of justice---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.

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC

2025 CLC 236 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANMUHAMMAD ALI VS SECRETARY BOARD OF REVENUE, GOVT. OF BALOCHISTAN. Ss. 39, 42 and 54 - Balochistan Land Revenue Act, 1967 - Suit for cancella…
2025 CLC 297 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANMUHAMMAD ALAM VS Malik ZAHOOR AHMED. Ss.42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss. 24, 35a & 115---Suit for declaration and injunction-…
2025 CLC 276 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANALI AKBAR VS Mst. NASEEM. S. 5, Sched---Maintenance allowance of minors---Father, responsibility of---Scope---Definition of maintenance, whi…
2025 CLC 253 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANDAD MUHAMMAD VS NATIONAL DATABASE and REGISTRATION AUTHORITY through Director General NADRA Provincial Headquarter Zarghoon Road, Quetta. Ss…
2025 CLC 1852 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESHABANA PARVEEN VS Malik MOHSIN HASSAN RASHEED Ss. 2(l) & 24---Eviction application---Relationship of landlord and tenant, denial of---Order…
2025 CLC 1852 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESHABANA PARVEEN VS Malik MOHSIN HASSAN RASHEED Words "may" and "shall" used in a section of an Act or an Ordinance---Whether directory or ma…

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