| Case ID |
0c23a9b2-8b6f-47db-8360-228fd1868012 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Revision No. 5 of 2019 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 21, 2019 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 18, 2019 |
| Decision |
The application under Section 12(2), C.P.C. filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the District Judge Gilgit. The court found that there was no fraud committed by the respondent, no misrepresentation of the plaintiff before the trial court, and that the District Court Gilgit had the jurisdiction to entertain the defamation case under the Defamation Ordinance, 2002. Consequently, the petition filed by the plaintiff was not sustainable in the eyes of the law. The trial court's decision to dismiss the application was upheld, and the revision petition was consequently dismissed as well. No costs were ordered, and the file was closed. |
| Summary |
In the Civil Revision No. 5 of 2019 case, decided on June 21, 2019, and heard on June 18, 2019, Justice Ali Baig presided over the dispute between petitioner Sher Afzal and respondent Jangi Bahadur. The petitioner had initially filed a defamation suit for the recovery of Rs.50 crore against the respondent on April 29, 2016, but subsequently withdrew the case on May 10, 2016, claiming that the parties had settled the matter amicably. Despite the withdrawal, the petitioner filed an application under Section 12(2) of the Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), alleging that the District Judge Gilgit had dismissed the suit without obtaining his consent or recording his statement, thereby lacking jurisdiction. The respondent contested this application, asserting that the petitioner had appeared before the court and requested the withdrawal of the suit voluntarily. After thorough consideration, the court found no evidence of fraud, misrepresentation, or lack of jurisdiction. The petitioner had actively participated in the proceedings and did not provide sufficient grounds to sustain the application under Section 12(2), C.P.C. As a result, the trial court's decision to dismiss the application was upheld, and the revision petition was dismissed accordingly. This case underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements in civil litigation and the necessity for clear evidence when challenging judicial decisions under the Civil Procedure Code. Key legal principles in this case relate to the validity of judicial orders, the grounds for filing applications under Section 12(2), and the jurisdiction of district courts in defamation matters under the Defamation Ordinance, 2002. |
| Court |
District Court Gilgit
|
| Entities Involved |
Muhammad Umar,
District Judge Gilgit
|
| Judges |
ALI BAIG, JUSTICE
|
| Lawyers |
Ehsan Ali for Petitioner,
Zafar Iqbal for Respondent
|
| Petitioners |
SHER AFZAL
|
| Respondents |
JANGI BAHADUR
|
| Citations |
2021 SLD 1442,
2021 YLR 547
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
12(2)
|