FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through General Manager, Railway Headquarters
The Federation of Pakistan sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of its civil revision by the High Court, which had affirmed the trial court's refusal to delete an allegedly unnecessary issue framed in a civil suit. The core legal question was whether the framed issue was redundant in light of an amended written statement. The Supreme Court held that upon comparing the language of the issue with the relevant averments in the plaint and the amended written statement, the issue was indeed necessary as the relevant language in the amended written statement remained unaltered. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, laying down the principle that an issue framed by a trial court will not be deemed redundant or unnecessary where the pleadings and amended written statements substantiate the controversy addressed by that issue.
- Whether an issue framed by a trial court becomes redundant upon the amendment of a written statement?
- Can the High Court interfere in revisional jurisdiction regarding the framing of issues when the trial court's decision is justified by the pleadings?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J.---The Federation of Pakistan as defendant in a civil suit, has sought leave to appeal against the dismissal by the High Court of its Civil Revision. The grievance made is that there was allegedly an unnecessary issue framed by the trial Court which refused to delete the same on the application of the petitioner; and, the. High Court also while affirming the trial Court's decision declined to interfere in its Revisional jurisdiction.
2. We having seen the language of issue concerned and compared it with the language used in the relevant averments in the plaint and the written statement, have not been able to agree with the learned counsel that the issue was unnecessary. His attempt to argue that the written statement having been amended with the permission of the Court at an earlier stage, the amendment made the disputed issue redundant, is also of no avail because the language referred to above in the amended written statement which justified the framing of the disputed issue, remained unaltered.
3. That being so, there is no force in this petition and the same is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- FAISAL SULTAN vs E.D.O. (EDUCATION) and others 2011 PLC (C.S.) 419