MUHAMMAD AQIL Versus NAWAB AHMED

In spite of intimation .through P.CA.D. nobody has appeared on behalf of the respondent to contest this revision petition, therefore, he is hereby proceeded against ex parte.

2. A suit was filed by the petitioner for recovery of an amount of Rs3,689.65 on account of loss caused by the respondent when he was employee of Railway and posted at Sialkot. The respondent did not enter appearance to contest the suit, therefore, he was proceeded against ex parte. The learned trial Court after recording ex parte evidence held that since the shortage in dispute was detected with effect from 27‑6‑1967 to 30‑6‑1967 and the respondent was retired from service on 11‑9‑1967, therefore, the suit filed on 24‑2‑1979 after the expiry of more than eleven years was hopelessly barred by time, as such, consequently the suit was dismissed through judgment, dated 24‑10‑1979.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner basing his argument on Article 149 of the Limitation Act, urged that the limitation period in case Government was plaintiff was 60 years and the learned trial Court erroneously assumed as if limitation period provided under the Limitation Act, for such suits, filed by a private person as plaintiff was attracted.

4. The argument has considerable force. It appears that the learned trial Court was not conscious of the provisions of Article 149 of the Limitation Act and the erroneous view taken by it has resulted in failure to exercise jurisdiction by it to entertain the suit and decide the same on merits as the same was not barred by time.

5. The revision petition for the foregoing reasons is accepted. The judgment and decree, dated 24‑10‑1979 is set aside and the suit is remanded to the learned trial Court for disposal on merits. There will be no order as to costs.

H.B.T./P‑12/L Revision accepted.