Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
2008 YLR 107

MUHAMMAD ABBAS vs MUHAMMAD TUFAIL

Citation2008 YLR 107
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Civil Revision No, 2105 of 2005 and C.M. No,382 of 2007
Date2007-09-10
Judge(s)Mian Hamid Farooq
ResultApplication allowed

ORDER

C.M. No,3.82 of 2007 ' MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J. Instant application, filed on behalf of the revision petitioner under section 148, C.P.C., seeks following relief:- ' "It is therefore most respectfully prayed that time period for depositing cost amount of Rs,10,000 may kindly be extended and petitioner may very graciously be allowed to deposit the same.

' It is further prayed that as alternate order of this Hon'ble Court to the extent of depositing cost may very graciously he clarified for the sake of justice and fair play."

2. Background leading to the application in hand is that applicant's revision petition (C.R.No,2105/2005) was allowed by this Court. On 10-7-2006 and the petitioner was directed to pay costs of Rs,10,000 to the respondent or to deposit the said amount with the trial Court within a period of 30 days from the receipt of certified copy of order; tie applicant, on 12-7-2006 applied for the certified copy of order dated 10-7-2006 and it was prepared and delivered to the petitioner on 26-3-2007; the petitioner, on 31-3-2007 filed the application before the learned trial Court seeking permission to deposit the amount of costs of Rs,10,000 but the learned trial Court dismissed the said application on the ground that the payment was directed to be made within 30 days and it is out of time, vide order dated 10-4-2007 hence the present petition.

3. Upon the receipt of this application, this Court, on 7-5-2007 called for report from the copying agency, whereupon it was reported hat due to rush of work, petitioner's form was mis-placed and when it was traced it was sent to the copying agency for preparation of certified copy. It has been admitted in the report that there is delay on the part of office in preparation of certified copy.

4. I have heard the learned counsel and examined the available record. This Court, while allowing applicant's revision petition, has passed the following order:- "It is, therefore, ordered that subject to payment of costs in the amount of Rs,10,000 by the petitioner to the respondent or by such deposit in the trial Court within 30 days of a certified copy of this order being provided to the parties, the impugned judgments are set aside and the petitioner is allowed to file his defence and join the proceedings in the trial Court. In case the aforesaid payment is not made or deposited as directed, the impugned orders shall stand and remain effective and this petition would be deemed to have been dismissed."

(Underlining is for emphasis)

' It is evident from the above that the applicant was allowed a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of order, to deposit the amount of costs of Rs,10,000 with the learned trial Court. As noted above, the petitioner applied for the certified copy on 12-7-2006 which was supplied to him on 26-3-2007. In this regard, office was negligent in supplying the copy to the applicant as the question form along with the file was mis-placed, for which the applicant cannot be blamed. The applicant after getting the certified copy on 26-3-2007 filed the application before the learned trial Court on 31-3-2007 thus he after 5 days of receipt of the certified copy promptly filed the application. In view whereof, the applicant was neither negligent nor his conduct was contumacious. He applied for the certified copy two days after passing of the order dated 10-7- 2006 and filed the application before the learned trial Court after 5 days of getting the certified copy. The applicant did not defy the judgment dated 10-7-2006 passed by this Court rather he was active and conscious as he also filed an application before Deputy Registrar for obtaining certified copy. The delay of furnishing the certified copy cannot be attributed to the applicant and he cannot be made to suffer for non-compliance of the order.

5. In view of the above, instant application is allowed and order dated 10-4-2007 is set aside.

Resultantly applicant's application dated 31-3-2007 shall be deemed to be pending before the learned trial Court, which shall decide the same before 10-10-2007.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch