CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (CDA), through Chairman, Islamabad vs Dr — 2026 SCMR 1033 SUPREME-COURT

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

CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (CDA), through Chairman, Islamabad VS Dr. SHEIKH MUHAMMAD SHOAIB SHAFI. O.IX, Rr.7 & 13---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 5 & First Sched., Art.164---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.133---Ex-parte decree---Setting aside of---Sufficient cause---Counsel''s negligence---Liability of litigant---Public authorities---Duty to defend---Maladministration---Ex-parte proceedings---Right to participate and cross-examine---The respondents purchased the suit property after due verification from Capital Development Authority (CDA)---Subsequently, CDA cancelled the plot alleging tampering in revenue record---The respondents filed a civil suit which was decreed ex parte---CDA later filed an application under Order IX Rule 13, C.P.C., to set aside the ex-parte decree, which was dismissed by the Trial Court and upheld by the High Court---Thereafter, the matter reached the Supreme Court through filing of the present civil petition for leave to appeal---Held: The public authorities were obligated to contest court cases vigilantly with due diligence---Failure to do so amounted to a breach of their duty---In the present case, serious lapses, negligence and reckless conduct were apparent from the record---Despite various opportunities and change of counsel, CDA failed to actively defend the civil suit in question---In spite of availing various opportunities, neither any written statement was filed nor, even after being declared ex parte, did the counsel appear to avail the opportunity of cross-examination of the plaintiff, a heedless demeanour which debilitated their case and endorsed the case of the plaintiff---Upon passing of the ex-parte decree, a valuable right accrued in favour of the successful party and such decree could not be recalled unless the defendant proved sufficient cause, which could not be based on irresponsible conduct of counsel---No illegality, irregularity or perversity in the impugned judgment was found---Present petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (CDA), through Chairman, Islamabad vs Dr — 2026 SCMR 1033 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR