MUHAMMAD ASHRAF KHAN Versus CHIEF SECRETARY/REVENUE COMMISSIONER, G.B. GILGIT
ORDER
MUHAMMAD ALAM, J.--- Order dated 27-6-2015, of the learned first appellate court, that he passed in C.F.A. No.135/2014, found challenged through this petition. During pendency of the appeal, petitioner/plaintiff filed a petition under Order XI, Rule 14, C.P.C. Through impugned order, learned first appellate court has dismissed the petition dated 10-02-2015 of the petitioner/plaintiff.
2. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and have gone through the petition dated 10-02-2015 of the petitioner and have also gone through the impugned order. As the subject under discussion is petition under Order XI, Rule 14 C.P.C. dated 10-02-2015 of the petitioner, hereunder referred as application, therefore, for ready reference, I reproduce Order, XI Rule 14 C.P.C.:--
14. Production of documents.-- It shall be lawful for the court, at any time during the pendency of any suit, to order the production by any party thereto, upon oath, of such of the documents in his possession or power, relating to any matter in question in such suit, as the Court shall think right; and the Court may deal with such documents, when produced, in such manner as shall appear just.
Through application, petitioner has prayed as under:--
Joint perusal of application dated 10-02-2015 and the relevant law referred in the said application shows that the remedy sought through the application is quite different from the spirit and import of law referred in the said petition. Obviously, the law cited in the application provides for the remedy at the stage of discovery and inspection as is evident from the heading of the Order, XI, C.P.C. The said stage has Passed long ago. Moreover, the remedy sought through the application is very vague as through the application, applicant has sought just directions for production of the two documents referred therein and nothing else. So I am of the opinion that mere production of the documents does not serve any purpose of either of the parties.
3. I, therefore, hold that the impugned order is correct in all respects and the petition in hand is not fit to be admitted for regular hearing. Admission of petition for regular hearing refused. File.
HBT/110/GB Petition dismissed.