Messrs RIAZ MASOOD & BROTHERS vs PAKISTAN and another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of a Regular Second Appeal by the High Court. The petitioner had originally filed a suit for rendition of accounts regarding the supply of goods and non-payment of dues. The trial court and the appellate courts dismissed the suit on the grounds that the relief claimed was for a specific amount, necessitating a suit for recovery of a specific amount and the payment of appropriate court fees. The core legal question before the Supreme Court is whether the lower courts erred in dismissing the suit rather than allowing the petitioner to amend the plaint and supply the deficient court fees. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether, in the interest of justice, the petitioner should have been afforded the opportunity to rectify the procedural defects regarding the nature of the suit and the court fee, rather than facing outright dismissal. The Court identified that previous precedents regarding the amendment of pleadings and payment of court fees require further examination in this context.
- Should a plaintiff be allowed to amend a plaint for rendition of accounts to a suit for recovery of a specific amount?
- Can a court permit a plaintiff to supply deficient court fees instead of dismissing the suit?
- Is dismissal of a suit appropriate when the form of the suit is technically incorrect but the claim is identifiable?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by a plaintiff against the dismissal by the High Court of his Regular Second Appeal. The petitioner had filed a suit for rendition of accounts regarding supply of certain goods and non-payment of his dues. It was dismissed on the ground that the relief claimed being in respect of a specific amount, keeping in view the relationship between the parties, it should have been a suit for recovery of specific amount and accordingly court-fee should also have been affixed. The two learned appellate Courts having affirmed the dismissal of the suit, leave to appeal has now been sought.
2. After hearing both the learned counsel, we consider it a fit case to examine the questions raised in the petition including the question whether the petitioner should not have been allowed/asked to amend his plaint and also to supply the deficient court-fee. The judgments of this Court in Ghulam Bibi v. Sarsa Khan PLD 1985 SC 345, and Zulfiqar Ali v. Province of the Punjab 1986 SCMR 974 would also require examination in the foregoing context. Leave to appeal accordingly is granted.
3. ' Security Rs, 5,000.
4. ' The appeal to be heard on the present record with direction to file all necessary additional documents.
5. ' Leave to . revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.