Briefly, the petitioner Umar Nisar Cheema lodged a claim for recovery of damages caused by the expired Pedigree food alongwith the legal consultancy fee under section 25 of PCPA 2005, on 09.04.2009. As the claim was prima facie maintainable in pursuance of the report of Registrar therefore, the respondent/defendant was summoned to face trial in this case. The respondent/defendant Mian Muhammad Naeem made his appearance, submitted his written statement on 08.05.2009, when the case was fixed for preliminary arguments on 15.05.2009 and subsequently on 25.05.2009.
2. On 25.05.2009, none was present for petitioner/claimant despite repeated calls since morning till fag end hours of the court showing his lack of interest to pursue the proceedings in this claim, hence, the claim was dismissed for default in appearance on the same day.
3. On 30.05.2009, the petitioner/claimant submitted the petition in hand for restoration of the claim on the ground that the petitioner was in the Honourable Lahore High Court Lahore, in his personal matter there, whereas, his counsel was out of the city that, hence, the petitioner's non appearance was inadvertent under circumstance beyond his reach.
4. The respondent has submitted the written reply of the above said petition.
5. Heard the arguments. Record perused.
6. The petition for restoration is not sustainable on following grounds; a. The petition is not supported by an affidavit; b. There is no proof of appearance of the petitioner/claimant for his appearance in the Honourable Lahore High Court Lahore on the crucial date; c. The petitioner is not in attendance even today despite that the case was kept for his wait and several calls were made since morning.
The upshot of the above whole discussion is that, seen from what ever angle, the petition is not sustainable, the same is hereby dismissed. File be consigned to the record room after its due completions.