1999 M D 3349

[Karachi]

Before Hamid Ali Mirza, J

Khawaja MASOOD A!A" A##lica$%

&er'('

SA)**M+DD, -+"*SH, ."e'#o$de$%

Civil Revision No.97 and Civil Miscellaneous Application N0. 471 of 1995 decided on
16th May, 1997.

/a0 1i&il 2roced(re 1ode /3 of 19450.....

!s. 1"#"$, 115, 151 % &.'''()), R*. ", +Revision,ec*ee on -asis of f*aud,
.is*ep*esentation o* /ant of 0u*isdictionRespondent filed suit unde* &'''()), R." of
Civil 1*ocedu*e Code1etitione* appea*ed -efo*e Cou*t and .ade an application fo*
leave to defend2eave to defend /as *efused and suit /as dec*eed1etitione* instead
of filin3 an appeal, filed application unde* !.1"#"$ of Civil 1*ocedu*e Code(alidity
Refusal to 3*ant leave /ould neithe* a.ount to f*aud not a.ount to .is*ep*esentation o*
/ant of 0u*isdiction&*de* if ille3al o* i.p*ope* could have -een challen3ed -efo*e ne4t
hi3he* Cou*t.

Muha..ad 5asin v. Mst. Rafia 6i-i 7 Rafia !ultana and anothe* 12, 198+ 2ah. +779
Mst. ,il-a* :a.id v. ,*. ;hula. 6hee< =han and othe*s 1997 !CMR 6109 !unni (ie/
Coope*ative :ousin3 !ociety v. )*shad :ussain and othe*s 199+ C 2 C "++6 and ;hula.
Muha..ad v. M. Ah.ad =han and 6 othe*s 199+ !CMR 66" distin3uished.

/a0 1i&il 2roced(re 1ode /3 of 19450.....

&. '''()), R.", Appendi4 6, >o*. No. )(!u..ons not issued in >o*. No. )(,
Appendi4 6, C.1.C.?ffect!u..ons not issued in such fo*. /ould not vitiate
0ud3.ent and dec*ee passed -y Cou*t /hich othe*/ise /as co.petent to decide the
.atte*. Mian Mushta@ Ah.ed fo* Applicant.

A.R. Mi*Aa fo* Respondent.

O"D*"

Bhis is a civil *evision application unde* section 115 of C.1.C. di*ected a3ainst an o*de*,
dated 15"1995 passed -y )(th Additional ,ist*ict Cud3e =a*achi ?ast in !uit No.7 of
1994 and ?4ecution Application No." of 199" !alee.uddin 7u*eshi v. =ha/a0a Masood
An/a* /he*e-y an application unde* section 1"#"$, C.1.C. *ead /ith section 151, C.1.C.
filed -y applicant fo* settin3 aside the 0ud3.ent and dec*ee passed in !uit No.7 of 1994
on 1891994 /as dis.issed hence the p*esent *evision application.

6*ief facts of the case a*e that *espondent !alee.uddin 7u*eshi filed a suit unde* &*de*
+7, *ule ", C.1.C. fo* *ecove*y of Rs.7",000 on the -asis of p*onote e4ecuted -y
applicantDdefendantDC.,. fo* havin3 *eceived the said a.ount as f*iendly loan,
conse@uently su..ons #thou3h not st*ictly as *e@ui*ed -y la/$ /as issued to the
applicantDdefendant /ho put in appea*ance -efo*e the Cou*t and .ade an application
unde* &*de* +7, *ule +, C.1.C. fo* leave defend alon3/ith his affidavit and no counte*
affidavit /as filed -y *espondent -ut afte* hea*in3 leave to defend /as *efused on +15
191. Acco*din3ly the 0ud3.ent and dec*ee /as passed on +1st May, 1994.
applicantDdefendant did not p*efe* an appeal a3ainst the said 0ud3.ent and dec*ee -ut
filed an application unde* section 1"#"$, C.1.C. on "11"1994 /hich /as hea*d and
ulti.ately dis.issed as pe* i.pu3ned o*de*.

Bhe contention of lea*ned counsel fo* applicant is that the su..on >o*. No. )(,
Appendi4 E6E as *e@ui*ed -y *ule " of the &*de* +7, C.1.C. not issued -ut a notice /as
issued and that the lea*ned B*ial Cou*t ille3ally *efused to 3*ant leave to defend the suit
/hen the*e /as no counte*affidavit f*o. the side of the *espondentDplaintiff in *espect of
pleas ta<en -y the applicant as such the*e /as no 0ustification to disallo/ the application
fo* lea. e to defend conse@uently, the 0ud3.ent and dec*ee passed /ould -e invalid and
ille3al.

!ection 1"#"$, of C.1.C. *unsF

GHhe*e a pe*son challen3es the validity of a 0ud3.ent, dec*ee o* o*de* on the plea of
f*aud, .is*ep*esentation o* /ant of 0u*isdiction, he shall see< his *e.edy -y .a<in3 an
application to the Cou*t /hich passed the final 0ud3.ent and dec*ee o* o*de* and not -y a
sepa*ate suit.G

Ad.ittedly, in the instant case, the applicantDdefendant did appea* in the Cot and filed an
application fo* leave to defend the suit alon3/ith his affidavit /hen no counte*affidavit
/as filed -y the *espondent -ut the t*ial Cou*t afte* hea*in3 *efused to 3*ant pe*.ission to
the applicantDdefendant fo* leave to defend the suit. Refusal to 3*ant leave /ould neithe*
a.ount to f*aud no* a.ount to .is*ep*esentation and the*e could not -e said to -e /ant
of 0u*isdiction. Bhe o*de* if ille3al, i.p*ope* on factual and le3al side, could have -een
challen3ed -efo*e the ne4t hi3he* Cou*t -ut it /as not challen3ed in appeal. Me*e fact
that the su..ons /as not issued in the fo*. p*esc*i-ed /ould not itself vitiate the
0ud3.ent and dec*ee passed -y the Cou*t /hich othe*/ise /as co.petent to decide the
.atte*. Bhe said p*ovisions of *ule " of &*de* 1", C.1 .C. a*e not att*acted in the instant
case as the contentions *aised not fall /ithin the .ischief of f*aud, .is*ep*esentation o*
/ant of 0u*isdiction. 2ea*ned counsel has placed *eliance upon Muha..ad 5asin v. Mst.
Rafia 6i-i I Rafia !ultana and anothe* #12, 198+ 2ah. +77$, Mst. ,il-a* :a.id v. ,*.
;hula. 6hee< =han and othe*s #1997 !CMR 610$9 !unni (ie/ Coope*ative :ousin3
!ociety v. )*shad :ussain and othe*s #199+ C2C "++6$ and ;hula. Muha..ad v. M.
Ah.ad =han and si4 othe*s #199+ !CMR 66"$. Bhe facts of cited cases a*e @uite
diffe*ent and distin3uisha-le to the facts of instant case and a*e of no help to the case of
applicant. Acco*din3ly, ) do not find .e*its in the contentions and *evision /hich is
he*e-y dis.issed.

7.M.:.DM.A.=.DM"84D= Revision dis.issed.