Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: BEGUM NUSRAT BHUTTO VS Respondent: PAKISTANHonorable Justice Nasir Aslam ZahidKazi Mahfooz Ahmad,A.H. Lakho
1989 C L C 1069
1989 C L C 1069
[Karachi]
Before Nasir Aazam Zahid, J
BEGUM NUSRAT BHUTTO and 5 others‑‑Applicants/Defendants versus
PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Interior, Islamabad‑‑Respondent/Plaintiff
Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1994 of 1988 (in Suit No.181 of 1984), decided on 29th May, 1988.
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑
‑‑‑0. XLVII, R.1‑‑Review‑‑Contentions that no details had been given in the plaint, pleadings of the plaintiff were not complete and defendants had beer burdened with the task of getting information which should have been given in plaint‑‑Held, what ever relevant information was available with the plaintiff was provided which was sufficient to file written. statement‑‑Review application was dismissed.
Kazi Mahfooz Ahmad for Plaintiff., A.H. Lakho for Defendants.
ORDER
Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1994 of 1988 has been filed by the defendants for review of the order dated 6‑3‑1988. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the defendants Mr. A . H. Lakho as follows:‑
(1) No details have been given in the plaint as required by law.
(2) Pleadings of the plaintiff have to be completed before the defendants can be asked to file their written statement.
(3) The application filed by the defendants in (C . M . A .5216 of 1987) has been dismissed without any reasons.
(4) The defendants have been burdened with the task of getting information from the offices of the plaintiff which information should have been given in the plaint. In this matter some further and better particulars were supplied and the Additional Registrar has passed the order that such better and further particulars are sufficient. On a question from the Court. Mr. Kazi Mahfooz, learned counsel for the plaintiff, states that whatever relevant and specific information was available with the plaintiff has been given in the plaint and in the further and better particulars already supplied by the plaintiff. This statement by learned counsel for the plaintiff is taken on record. In the circumstances I do not find any necessity for reviewing the order dated 6‑3‑1988. Whatever information that has been given in the plaint and in further and better particulars, according to the A plaintiff, is the information available with the plaintiff. On that basis a written statement can be filed by the defendants. C . M. A .1994 of] 1988 is accordingly dismissed.
M . Z . S . / N‑146/ K Review application dismissed.