Zia Shahid

In the Lahore High Court, Bench at Bahawalpur.

C.R. No._____________/2001 1.

Zia Shahid Chief Editor

Daily Khabrain

2.

Adnan Awais

12-Lawrence Road, Lahore.

Editor

Petitioners/Defendants VERSUS 1. Rana Ikram Ullah Khan S/o Abdul Hamid Khan, caste Rajpoot, R/o 56-Lawyers Colony, Bahawal Nagar. Respondent/Plaintiff 2. Khushnood Ali Khan Chief Editor Daily “Sahafat” Umer Market, Iqbal Town, Lahore. Respondent/Defendant

Revision Petition U/s 115 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 19.6.2001, 13.4.2001 and Ex-parte decree dated 31.7.2000 passed by Mr. Abdul Rehman Khan, the learned A.D.J. Bahawal Nagar, Ch. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal the learned Civil Judge, Bahawal Nagar, respectively. Claim in Revision: To set aside the both impugned orders & Ex-parte decree and petitioners be allowed to participate in the proceedings of suit accordingly.

Respectfully Sheweth: 1. That the names and addresses of the parties have correctly been given for the purpose of their summons and citations.

2. That the respondent No. 1 filed a recovery suit amounting to Rs. 24,900/- as damages in the court of Senior Civil Judge, Bahawal Nagar against the petitioner and respondent No. 2. This suit was ex-parte decreed on 31.7.2000. The copies of plaint, oral evidence, documentary evidence and judgment along-with decree sheet are Annexes “A, A/1, A/2 & A/3” respectively. 3. That as well as the petitioners received the information of decree dated 31.7.2000 the petitioner filed an application under order 9, rule 13 along-with an application for the suspension of operation of decree on 13.11.2000, for which the reply was filed on 9.1.2001. The learned Trial Court, without framing any issue, fixed the case for arguments and on 13.4.2001, without mentioning any time upon the order sheet. In fact the application for interim relief was fixed for arguments, but the main application was dismissed as well. Copies of application, reply and order sheet are Annexes “B, B/1 and B/3” respectively. 4. That the petitioners filed an appeal on 12.5.2001 along-with an application after interim relief against the order dated 13.4.2001. This appeal was dismissed vide order dated 19.6.2001. The copies of Grounds of appeal, order sheet and impugned order are Annexes “C, C/1 & C/2”. 5. That the ex-parte decree and both the impugned orders are liable to be set aside inter alia on the following: GROUNDS a)

That ex-parte decree and both the orders are passed against the canons of natural justice and law of equity.

b)

That the learned trial court as well as appeal court acted arbitrarily and against the prevailing law.

c)

That during the proceedings of suit, the proper procedure for the service of petitioners was not adopted. The real sense of order 5, rules 20 & 21 C.P.C. was not taken into consideration.

d)

That the publication in the daily “Saadat” was also against the provisions regarding substituted service. However, no postal certificate is tendered in the evidence.

e)

That contents of plaint, oral evidence and documentary evidence prima facie do not create any cause for damages.

f)

That even the petitioners were condemned unheard, however, there was no reason and material available on the file to decree the suit.

g)

That the application for setting aside the ex-parte decree (under order 9, rule 13) was filed within limitation, but the petitioners were again condemned unheard and the same was dismissed for non-prosecution.

h)

That the order for dismissal of application under order 9, rule 13 was premature, because the same was not fixed for hearing. On that day, the learned court had fixed the case for arguments on application for the interim relief.

i)

That after submission of reply of application under 9, rule 13 normally issued are framed and such applications are almost decided on merits, but no issues were framed in this case.

j)

That the learned appellate court also decided the case on technical grounds, which are always deprecated by the superior courts.

k)

That both the lower courts passed the orders against the set principles of law and justice.

l)

That both the lower courts ignored the principles for the decision of the cases on merits and not on technicalities.

m)

That all the impugned orders have caused a great miscarriage of justice to the petitioners. It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that order dated 19.6.2001 passed by learned A.D.J. order dated 13.4.2001 passed by learned Civil Judge and ex-parte decree dated 13.7.2000, may please be set aside and petitioners may please be allowed to participate in the proceedings of original suit. Any other order, direction or relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit, may please be granted ini the interest of justice. Humble Petitioners,

Dated: ___________

Through: Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176

CERTIFICATE: Certified as per instructions of the client, that this is the first revision petition on the subject matter. No such petition has earlier been filed before this Hon’ble Court. Advocate

In the Lahore High Court, Bench at Bahawalpur.

C.R. No._____________/2001 Zia Shahid etc.

Vs.

Rana Ikram Ullah Khan etc.

Application U/o 21 & 26, Order 43, Rule 5 & Sec-151 C.P.C.

AFFIDAVIT of: Zia Shahid Chief Editor Daily Khabrain, 12-Lawrence Road, Lahore.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of the above-mentioned petition are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto. DEPONENT

Verification: Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day of August 2001 that the contents of this affidavit are true & correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DEPONENT

In the Lahore High Court, Bench at Bahawalpur.

C.R. No._____________/2001 Zia Shahid etc.

Vs.

Rana Ikram Ullah Khan etc.

INDEX S. No. DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES 1

Urgent Form

2

Revision Petition.

3

Copy of Plaint.

4

Copy of Oral Evidence.

A/1

5

Copy of Documentary Evidence.

A/2

6

A/3

10

Copy of judgment along-with decree sheet. Copies of application, reply and order sheet. Copies of grounds of appeal, order sheet and impugned order. Application U/o 21 & 26, order 43, rule 5 & Sec-151 C.P.C. Affidavit.

11

Power of Attorney.

7 8 9

PAGES

A

B, B/1 & B/2 C, C/1 & C/2

PETITIONERS Dated: ____________ Through: Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176

In the Lahore High Court, Bench at Bahawalpur.

C.R. No._____________/2001 Zia Shahid etc.

Vs.

Rana Ikram Ullah Khan etc.

Application U/o 21 & 26, Order 43, Rule 5 & Sec-151 C.P.C.

Respectfully Sheweth: 1. That the contents of revision petitioner shall be treated as the integral part of this application. 2. That prima facie the applicants have a good arguable case. 3. That the applicants have been condemned unheard. 4. That both the lower courts have decided the case on technicalities, but not on merits. 5. That it is a money decree, if not suspended the applicants shall face irreparable loss. 6. That balance of convenience and balance of justice is in favour of the applicants. It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the operation of impugned decree/orders may please be suspended till the final decision of main petition. Humble Applicants, Dated: _________ Through: Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176