| Case ID |
2bbd049f-90b3-4190-8393-0035dd67d9d2 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
R.F.A. No.12 of 2011 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 25, 2013 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The appeal was accepted, and the impugned judgment and decree dated 27-11-2010 was set aside. The suit of the appellant/plaintiff for recovery of Rs.13,27,250 was decreed in his favor, with no order as to costs. The court found that the trial court had failed to appreciate the evidence properly and that the plaintiff had proved the execution of the pro-note by presenting the scribe and marginal witnesses. The court emphasized that the minor discrepancies in the witnesses' statements were not sufficient to non-suit the plaintiff, as the defendant had admitted the execution of the pro-note, which shifted the burden of proof to him. |
| Summary |
In the case of R.F.A. No.12 of 2011, the Peshawar High Court addressed an appeal regarding the dismissal of a suit for recovery under a pro-note. The appellant, Abdul Karim, contested the trial court's decision, arguing that it failed to properly evaluate the evidence presented, including testimonies from key witnesses. The court highlighted the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, particularly Section 118, which establishes a presumption of due execution for negotiable instruments. The ruling underscored that minor inconsistencies in witness statements do not negate the validity of the pro-note, especially when the defendant admitted to its execution. The decision sets a precedent for future cases involving negotiable instruments, clarifying the burden of proof and the importance of proper evidence evaluation by lower courts. The case emphasizes the need for rigorous adherence to procedural rules and the critical role of witness credibility in legal disputes. Keywords: Negotiable Instruments Act, pro-note, Peshawar High Court, evidence evaluation, burden of proof. |
| Court |
Peshawar High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
ABDUL LATIF KHAN, J
|
| Lawyers |
Muhammad Abdullah Baloch for Appellant,
Muhammad Imran Khan Gandapur for Respondent
|
| Petitioners |
ABDUL KARIM
|
| Respondents |
MUHAMMAD IDREES
|
| Citations |
2014 SLD 2128,
2014 CLD 1001
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Negotiable Instruments Act,
Civil Procedure Code
|
| Sections |
118,
O. XXXVII, R.2
|