1224/2001 Suit MST. HAFEEZ BEGUM (Plaintiff) V/S MRS. ZAINAB MUHAMMAD ALI (Defendant)
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
1224/2001 Suit MST. HAFEEZ BEGUM (Plaintiff) V/S MRS. ZAINAB MUHAMMAD ALI (Defendant) Sindh High Court
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar Order Date: 02-OCT-13
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.75---Partition Act (IV of 1893), S.4---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss. 42 & 54---Suit for declaration, injunction and partition---Local Commission, appointment of---Recording of evidence---Object and scope---Local Commission already appointed returned the commission due to attitude of counsel for defendant---Plea raised by defendant was that recording of evidence was function of court and appointment of Commission would delay the matter---Validity---If High Court had power to save its time by recording evidence through the Commission, it was expected the counsel appearing for litigants should facilitate the court and cooperate with Commissioners as it was always in their own benefit---Whatever time saved by court in recording of evidence, was consumed by the court in other urgent matters requiring immediate orders in different cases and at the same time it would give some space to the court in reducing backlog by pronouncing lengthy judgments in cases which were ripe for final disposal---High Court appointed another Commissioner for recording of further evidence.