| Case ID |
0350bcc9-94ee-45bc-b30b-8abf3a34cf29 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
D-533 and Miscellaneous 2929 of 2012 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 24, 2013 |
| Hearing Date |
Apr 16, 2013 |
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court ruled that the revision filed by Respondent No.1 against the dismissal of the suit was not maintainable. The court highlighted that the suit was dismissed for non-prosecution and emphasized that a decree follows even if a suit is dismissed, allowing for a first appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code. The court noted that the respondent had failed to deposit the ordered costs, leading to the finality of the dismissal order. The court concluded that the impugned order by the Additional District Judge was coram non judice and thus could not stand. |
| Summary |
In the case of MUHAMMAD TARIQ MANSOORI vs ABDUL GHANI MANSOORI, the Sindh High Court addressed critical issues surrounding the Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) and the maintainability of revisions against dismissal orders. The court examined the procedural requirements for restoring a suit and the implications of non-compliance with court orders. The ruling underscored the importance of adhering to judicial directives and clarified the distinction between appeals and revisions in civil litigation. This case serves as a significant reference for legal practitioners dealing with procedural compliance and the consequences of inaction in civil suits, particularly within the context of the Civil Procedure Code. Keywords: Civil Procedure Code, maintainability, revision, dismissal, appeal. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUSHIR ALAM, C.J.,
NADEEM AKHTAR, J
|
| Lawyers |
Zahid Farooq Mazari,
Mirza Asif Baig,
Nemo
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD TARIQ MANSOORI
|
| Respondents |
,
ABDUL GHANI MANSOORI
|
| Citations |
2013 SLD 903,
2013 CLC 1763
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
O.IX,R.4,
O.IX,R.96,
O.IX,R.115
|