This civil revision is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14-3-2001, wherebythe appeal of the petitioner/Corporation was dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 19-11- 1999 of the learned trial Court for the recovery of Rs,25,000 as damages against the petitioner and in favour of the respondent was maintained.
2. The facts are that the house of the respondent is situated on Haq Nawaz Road, Rawalpindi.
According to the contention made by the respondent in the plaint, the petitioner as a Municipal Body has failed to discharge its obligation to ensure smooth drainage and sewerage system.
According to the averments in the plaint, the petitioner was constructing a (Lt) on the Nullah in the vicinity of the house of the respondent which, construction was left incomplete in a most negligent manner. The petitioner was also negligent in getting the said drain cleaned, opened and unobstructed. According to the plaint, on 31-7-1997, the Nullah overflowed due to the incomplete
(4) whereby rainy water entered the house of the respondent and caused damage to the tune of Rs,25.000.
3. Summons were issued to the petitioner-Corporation and on 3-2-1999, one. Iftikhar Ahmad, representative of the petitioner appeared before the Court. However, thereafter, neither the petitioner appeared through its functionaries before the trial Court on various dates nor even the written statement was filed. The petitioner was proceeded against exparte by the learned trial Court. The learned trial Court after recording exparte evidence of the respondent decreed the suit for a sum of Rs,25,000 in favour of the respondent vide judgment and decree dated 19-11-1999. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 14-3-2001.
4. The learned appellate Court also re-counted the several dates of hearing, upon which. the petitioner failed to appear before the learned trial Court and agreed that the learned trial Court had no option but to proceed exparte against the petitioner and that there is no justification for the petitioner for its non-appearance before the learned trial Court. It is also noteworthy that even before the learned Appellate Court, the respondent displayed a very rational attitude when he asked for making arrangement by the petitioner so that filthy and rainy water may not overflow and enter his house. Even the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner stated to have requested the petitioner-Authorities to redress the grievance of the respondent but to no avail. It was observed in the order of the learned Appellate Court that the Municipal Engineer and Health Officer who were summoned in the Court for 20-2-2001 did not appear in the Court.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the act of the learned Court in proceeding exparte against the petitioner was not in accordance with law. He also submitted that the respondent had failed to produce any convincing evidence, by which, the extent of damages could be determined. According to him, mere oral evidence of the respondent was insufficient for the grant of a decree in a specific sum.
6. On the other hand. the respondent appearing in person stated that he had been continuously beseeching the petitioner and its responsible officers to complete the construction of the (Lt) and to perform its statutory functions, so that no damage is caused to the respondent but the officials of petitioner acted with culpable negligence and derelictions of duty which resulted in the loss caused to him. In this contest, he submitted that the statement of P.W.1 and his own statement as P.W.2 were unrebutted on the record and were sufficient to warrant a decree which was accordingly passed.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, no exception Zan be taken to the findings of both the learned lower Courts wherein it has been held that the exparte proceedings taken against the petitioner were in accordance with law. Both the learned lower Courts also took note of the conduct of the officials of the petitioner who showed scant regard for the obligation placed upon them in performance of their municipal functions. The quantum of damages in such cases cannot always be determined with any mathematical accuracy. In such cases, it is advantageous to follow the Rule of the Thumb. The statements of P.W.1 and P.W.2 were found sufficient by the learned lower Courts to concurrently pass the decree now impugned in this civil revision.
8. There, is nothing in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner or on the record to persuade this Court to take a different view. The civil revision is devoid of merit which is hereby dismissed in limine.