ABDUL RAZZAK Versus PFIZER LABORATORIES LTD

ORDER

This will be a very unusual order because the learned counsel for the defendants, while conceding that the provisions of Order XI of the C.P.C. are procedural, however, submits that in peculiar circumstances of this case this order should be passed in the interest of justice. This suit was filed by the plaintiff against the Limited Company which, according to the learned counsel, enjoys good reputation in the commercial circle and its shares will be quoted in the Stock Market, but on account of the present suit the defendants are suffering great hardships and their shares cannot be quoted. Even if they are quoted, they will be quoted at a very lower value.

This suit has been filed for the recovery of Rs.57 millions only. As I see the plaint, out of 83 defendants originally cited, the names of 82 defendants have been scored off and now only this Limited Company remains in the field to answer this liability. Learned counsel for the Defendant No.l submits that the entire claim is cooked up and imaginary. Nothing is recoverable from them. It was for this reason that the defendant No.l moved an Application under Order XI, Rule 12, C . P. C . for the discovery of any material which the Plaintiff could produce in support of his claim. This application C . M. A . No.1092/85) came up before the Addl. Registrar and after due notice and appearance of the Defendant No.l before the Addl. Registrar an order was passed on 3‑4‑1985 by the Addl. Registrar calling upon the plaintiff to file the affidavit of documents within four weeks. This order was passed by the Addl. Registrar on 3‑4‑1985 and the affidavit of documents could be filed within four weeks. The case was called up on 7‑5‑1985 and the order shows that no affidavit of documents was filed. The case was then posted for settlement of the issues in Court. The case was called on 22‑9‑1985 for the issues and the order sheet of that date shows that consent issues were filed and accepted and the parties were required to file documents and application for commission within three months.

3. Learned counsel for the Defendant No.l points out that till date no affidavit of documents or list of witnesses have been filed, nor indeed the order of the Addl. Registrar for filing the Affidavit of Documents has been complied with. According to the learned counsel, this conduct on the part of the plaintiff shows that he has no case and this suit has been filed merely to blackmail and harass the Defendant and to force them for a compromise on inequitable and oppressive terms.

4. I am conscious of the fact that on account of such procedural problems which some time crop up on account of indifference on the part of the litigant concerned, but mostly on account of the negligence of counsel appearing in the case, rules of procedure calling for penal actions should not be rigidly enforced, because they are likely to cause prejudice to the litigant. But Mr. S. Ahsan Rizvi, learned counsel appearing for the defendants points out that on account of this pending suit, he is being harassed and all his business plans and commercial activities stand paralysed. He has no other means for an early resolution of this controversy and would continue to suffer on account of the irresponsive attitude and conduct of the Plaintiffs. Learned Counsel relies on A.I.R. 1957 Allahabad 400. This happens to be one of few cases in which Rule 21 of Order XI, C.P.C. has been invoked and relief has been granted against the defaulter.

In view of the special circumstances of the case I am constrained to say that the Defendants have been able to make out a case for and order in their favour and this suit is, therefore, dismissed for in terms of Rule 21 of Order XI, C.P.C.

H . B . T . / A‑188/ K / Suit dismissed.