SHAHID HUSSAIN vs ABDUL JABBAR TASSADUQ O — 2026 PLD 75 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.

SHAHID HUSSAIN VS ABDUL JABBAR TASSADUQ O. XLI, Rr. 23 & 25---Remand of case by the Appellate Court---Trial Court, responsibility of---Remand as a whole or only on specific point(s)---Scope---Trial Court decreed the suit for recovery on the basis of promissory note yet on appeal High/Appellate Court remanded the case, however, on post-remand proceedings the suit was dismissed on failure of the plaintiff was produce evidence---Argument of the appellant/plaintiff was that Trial Court should have discussed/considered the evidence adduced by the parties prior to the order of remand---Question whether the Trial Court fell to error while not discussing or considering the evidence adduced by the parties prior to the order of remand?---Held, that on remand the Court trying the suit has to regulate the proceedings or proceed with the case in terms of order of remand passed by the higher Court---Attempt to sidetrack issue or decision in a manner, not directed by Higher Court, can result into defiance of remand order---In the present case, the relevant part of order of remand passed in appeal by the High/Appellate Court reflected that the Trial Court was ordered to try the suit after placing onus of proving of execution and signing of the promissory note by the respondent and also to refer the matter to verify the signatures/thumb impressions on the promissory note; said part of the order also revealed that post remand proceedings were directed to be completed within stipulated time---It was not the case that the Trial Court was directed to merely frame the "issue" or "issues" and then return the findings to High Court---There was no direction in the order of remand to return the matter after recording the evidence---The case visibly was not covered under O. XLI, R. 25, C.P.C.---High/Appellate Court remanded the matter as a whole which fell within the scope of O. XLI, R. 23, C.P.C.---Perusal of O. XLI, R. 23, C.P.C., does not reflect if the legislature has envisaged to discard the pre-remand evidence altogether; which says the evidence recorded during the trial shall be the evidence after remand, which is subject to all just exceptions---The case has to be re-admitted by the Trial Court on the number allocated to it originally in the register---The suit cannot be treated as one freshly instituted on the date of the remand order---Otherwise serious questions as to limitation would arise---In fact, if any evidence was recorded before its earlier disposal, it would be evidence in the remanded suit---Thus, stance of the appellant/plaintiff (who sought to challenge the vires of a judgment on the point that the same was based on evidence recorded prior to remand order) was repelled as High/Appellate Court while deciding earlier appeal never intended that pre-remand evidence should be discarded in totality rather order was passed to place the onus on plaintiff and with the direction to take assistance of expert---Upon receipt of the same the Trial Court, which received the file, correctly perceived the order of remand when after framing the issues, by placing the burden on appellant as ordered by this/Appellate Court, the parties were directed to get recorded the additional evidence---Thus, the Trial Court while passing the final judgment hadrightly not considered the pre-remand evidence---Appeal, filed by plaintiff, was dismissed with costs.

SHAHID HUSSAIN vs ABDUL JABBAR TASSADUQ O — 2026 PLD 75 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD