P L D 2025 Balochistan 18
Before Rozi Khan Barrech, J
BIBI FAREEDA ---Petitioner
Versus
JAN BIBI ---Respondent
Civil Revision No. 75 of 2024, decided on 27th September, 2024.
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) ---
----Ss. 42, 104, 151 & 152--- Powers of courts under S.152, C.P.C. to correct clerical or
arithmetical errors ---Scope ---Petitioner against auction of the property in execution
proceedings preferred an appeal, which was allowed in the year 2021--- Application filed by
the petitioner under S. 152, C.P.C. in the year 2023 for correction of name of the appellant in
the title of appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Court on the ground of delay of two years -
--Validity ---There is no restriction on the power of the Court under Ss.151 & 152 of C.P.C.
to correct the mistake in the plaint, judgment or decree, if the same occurs due to a bona fide mistake or oversight and the party is not found to be guilty of gross negligence ---Mere fact
that the petitioner sought correction after a lapse of a period of two years was not a valid ground to refuse the relief ---Correction was not sought in the judgment and decree of Trial
Court, rather the same was sought qua correction of the name in the title of appeal filed
under S. 104, C.P.C., without prejudicing the other side ---Constitutional petition was
allowed, in circumstances.
(b) Administration of justice ---
----Procedural law ---Purpose and scope ---All the rules of procedural law have been enacted
for the purpose of administration of justice ---Basic purpose of all the rules is to serve the
administration of justice and they should be subordinate to it ---Procedural law should not be
construed strictly so as to put the parties to undue inconvenience because the principle object
behind all legal formalities is to safeguard the paramount interest of justice ---No one should
be defeated merely on the basis of technicalities unless offering insurmountable hurdles ---
Legal technicalities should not be allowed to stand in the way of justice, which may lead to unsettlement and uncertainty of law.
Saifullah Baloch for Petitioner.
Date of hearing: 25th September, 2024.
JUDGMENT
ROZI KHAN BARRECH, J. ---The petitioner feeling aggrieved from the order dated
19.12.2023 ("the impugned order") passed by learned Additional District Judge -I, Quetta,
("the appellate court"), whereby the application filed by the petitioner under section 152, C.P.C. for correction of the title of the appeal has been dismissed.
2. Precisely, the relevant facts of the instant case are that respondent Jan Bibi, wife of
Muhammad Gul filed a suit for declaration, partition, cancellation of mutation entry No. 132, possession, mandatory and permanent injunction against the father of the petitioner namely Ali Dost, son of late Karim Bakhsh before learned Senior Civil Judge -III, Quetta ("the trial
court").
3. After a full -dressed trial, the suit of the respondent was decreed in favour of the
respondent vide judgment and decree dated 28.08.2018. The respondent filed an execution application before the trial court. The petitioner contested the execution application and filed objections. During the pendency of the execution application, the judgment debtor namely Ali Dost, son of late Karim Bakhsh died and thereafter the executing court passed an order for the auction of the property. The petitioner being aggrie ved from the order passed by the
executing court filed an appeal under section 104, C.P.C. and the same was allowed vide
order dated 16.11.2021. In the year 2023, the petitioner filed an application under section 152, C.P.C. for correction of the title of appeal on the ground that the name of the appellant was typed mistakenly by Steno i.e. Bibi Fareeda instead of Fazila Bibi. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, the learned Additional District Judge -I, Quetta
dismissed the application of the petitioner on 19.12.2023, whereafter the instant petition was
filed.
4. Notice was issued to the respondent and the same was served upon the respondent but
despite service of notice and repeated calls, none appeared on behalf of the respondent; as
such, the respondent proceeded against ex- parte vide order dated 06.09.2024.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
6. It transpires from the record that a civil suit was filed by the respondent Jan Bibi, wife
of Muhammad Gul against Ali Dost, son of late Karim Bakhsh and after full -dressed trial, the
suit was decreed in favour of the respondent by the trial court. During execution proceedings, the judgment debtor Ali Dost died on 29.12.2020 and during the proceedings of the
execution application, the executing court passed an order for the auction of the property, the
wife of late Ali Dost namely Bibi Fazila filed an appeal under section 104, C.P.C. before
learned Additional District Judge -I, Quetta. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that
learned counsel for the petitioner on an urgency basis filed that appeal and typed the title of appeal as Bibi Fareeda instead of Bibi Fazila, due to a mistake of Steno and filed an
application under section 152, C.P.C. for correction of the name of Bibi Fareeda instead of
Bibi Fazila but the learned Additional District Judge -I, Quetta refused the same on the
ground that the petitioner filed application for correction of the name of the petitioner after
more than two years.
7. There is no restriction on the power of the court under sections 151 and 152 of the
Code of Civil Procedure to correct the mistake in the plaint, judgment, or decree, if the same occurs due a to bona fide mistake or oversight and the party is not found to be guilty of gross negligence. The mere fact that the petitioner sought correction after a lapse of a period of two years is not a valid ground
in the instant case to refuse her the relief sought. Learned counsel
stated that due to the mistake of Steno, he typed the name of the petitioner Bibi Fareeda
instead of Bibi Fazila. Even otherwise, the petitioner did not seek any correction in the judgment and decree passed by the trial court only sought correction of the name in the title of appeal filed under section 104, C.P.C., which does not prejudice the other side.
8. All the rules of procedural law have been enacted for the purpose of administration of
justice. The basic purpose of all the rules is to serve the administration of justice and they should be subordinate to it. It is a settled principle of jurisprudence that procedural law should not be construed strictly so as to put the parties to undue inconvenience because the principal object behind all legal formalities is to safeguard the paramount interest of justice. No one should be defeated merely on the basis of technicalities unless offering insurmountable hurdles. Legal technicalities should not be allowed to stand in the way of justice, which might lead to unsettlement and uncertainty of law.
9. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated 19.12.2023 passed by
learned Additional District Judge -I, Quetta is hereby set -aside and the application filed under
section 152, C.P.C. for correction of name in the title of the appeal is hereby accepted to the extent of the title of appeal as Bibi Fazila and others v. Jan Bibi and others instead of Bibi Fareeda and others v. Jan Bibi and others.
SA/104/Bal. Appeal alloweThis judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.