FAQIR MUHAMMAD and others vs Haji INAYATULLAH and others
This petition arises out of the dismissal of the petitioner's application for amendment of his plaint at the appellate stage, following the dismissal of his original suit by the trial court. While his first appeal was still pending, the petitioner filed a revision petition in the High Court challenging the interlocutory order regarding the amendment, which the High Court dismissed on merits. Upon seeking leave to appeal, the Supreme Court of Pakistan converted the petition into an appeal and upheld the dismissal, albeit on a different ground: that the revision petition was premature because the first appeal was still pending before the appellate court. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal with the observation that the points raised regarding the amendment of the plaint could be urged before the High Court if the appellants eventually failed before the first appellate court. The key principle laid down is that a revision petition against an interlocutory order refusing the amendment of a plaint is premature while the main appeal remains pending before the first appellate court.
- Whether a revision petition against the dismissal of an application for amendment of a plaint is premature while the main appeal is still pending before the first appellate court?
- Can a party challenge the dismissal of an amendment application before the High Court through a revision petition while the first appeal remains undecided?
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--This petition arises out of dismissal of the petitioner's application for amendment of his plaint at the appellate stage. His suit was dismissed earlier by the trial Court. His appeal was still pending when he filed a revision in the High Court challenging the dismissal of his application for amendment. That revision having been dismissed on merits, he has now sought leave to appeal.
2. After some hearing, both the learned counsel agreed that the question regarding amendment of the plaint in the circumstances of this case, could have been adequately dealt with, if the petitioner had brought the matter in the High Court in the case of his failure in the first appellate Court.
Accordingly, we convert this petition into appeal and upholding the dismissal of the petitioner's revision by the High Court; but on a different ground, namely that the revision should have been dismissed as premature, in the circumstances of this case. Therefore, in the light of the foregoing, the appeal, so converted, is dismissed with the remark that the points raised by the appellants against the dismissal of their application for amendment of the plaint, might be raised again before the High Court, if they fail before the first appellate Court. There shall be no order as to costs.