ALLAH DITTA vs MUHAMMAD RAMZAN O — 2026 CLC 760 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.

ALLAH DITTA VS MUHAMMAD RAMZAN O.XXXVII, R.3---Suit for recovery (of Rs. 15,00,00,000/-) on the basis of negotiable instrument /promissory note---Defendant's stance (denial of execution of negotiable instrument etc.), considering of---Leave to defend, grant of---Whether conditional or unconditional---Principles---Trial Court, powers of---Sound reasoning and judicious application of mind---Although the order of grant or refusal of leave to defend is discretionary yet the discretion upon which leave to defend can be granted conditionally or unconditionally is to be exercised on the basis of sound judicial reasoning---The defence taken by the applicant/defendant for grant of unconditional leave to defend should be of good standard, which should be considered plausible for grant of unconditional leave to defend---There should be application of mind for decision of the application for grant of leave to defend by keeping in view the standard and plausibility of defence of the applicant-defendant and such an order could not be passed in an arbitrary manner resulting in imposition of a condition merely at the asking of the plaintiff of the case---In the present case, though the Trial Court had considered the defence / facts of the petitioner/defendant like he neither obtained any amount from the respondent/plaintiff nor executed the pronote being result of fraud, forgery and impersonation and on the basis of these facts it was observed by the Trial Court that the petitioner had raised a plea whereby he had categorically refuted the claim of the respondent, which for its determination required grant of leave to defend; which meant that the defence plea raised by the petitioner was treated as plausible---However, while doing so the Trial Court had imposed a condition for deposit of surety bond equal to the amount claimed (Rs. 15,00,00,000/-) without considering the circumstances of the case and plausibility of defence raised by the petitioner---The order to the extent of imposition the said condition did not appear to be based on sound reasoning and judicious application of mind---High Court set-aside the impugned order with the observation that unconditional leave to defend be granted to the petitioner / defendant, however in light of concern of the respondent / plaintiff that matter might be delayed by granting unconditional leave to defend, High Court directed the concerned Trial Court to expeditiously conclude the trial of the case without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties and while doing so to keep in mind that prejudice is not caused to rights of any of the parties by keeping in view both the time tested principles of law that "justice delayed is justice denied" and "justice hurried is justice buried; so balance is to be struck between the said two principles---Revision Petition, was allowed accordingly.

ALLAH DITTA vs MUHAMMAD RAMZAN O — 2026 CLC 760 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLC