Rana MUMTAZ AHMED NOON vs MUHAMMAD JAVED KHAN

ORDER

' CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF, J.---Respondent- Muhammad Javed Khan filed a suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure against the petitioner seeking recovery of a total sum of Rs,13,94,500 on the basis of the cheques issued by the petitioner/defendant in favour of the plaintiff/respondent.

Petitioner made an application under rule 3, of Order XXXVII (ibid) to obtain leave to appear and defend the case on 7-3-1997. His averments were that he has been served; that the suit is false, without any basis and against facts; that he intends to produce evidence in support of his contention and defence in the exercise of his legal right and that, otherwise, he shall suffer irreparable loss. In reply to petitioner's application the other side resisted the same on the ground that the basis of the suit being the cheques issued by the defendant which were dishonoured, the application of the petitioner is sans reference to any plausible defence whatsoever, therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed.

2. The learned District Judge, Bahawalpur, declined petitioner's request vide his order dated 6-6- 1997 holding that the same ".. Does not disclose any plausible defence, or even specific question of law, or fact which requires to be tried or investigated. The affidavit on the point is also silent.... ".

3. Petitioner-Rana Mumtaz Ahmed Noon, remaining unsuccessful before the Lahore high Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur in his Civil Revision No,229 of 1997, against the order of the trial Court dated 6-6-1997, on 26-6-1997, has now filed this petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 for leave to appeal against judgment dated 26-6-1997. Of the High Court.

4. Mr. Rana Abdul Raheem, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing in support of this petition, has not at all disputed the fact that petitioner's application, seeking leave to appear and defend the suit against him, did not contain any specific plea or question of law or fact which required investigation. He did not even so much as contest the findings of the learned Judge in Chambers of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur which are supported by, inter alia, this Court's judgment in case reported as Messrs National Security Insurance Company Limited and others v. Messrs Hoechet Pakistan Limited and others (1992 SCM R 718). We are also of the vierw that in the absance of even an averment in the application of the petitioner before the Trial Court seeking leave to appear and defend the suit against him under Order XXXVII (ibid), the order dated 6-6-1997 was rightly upheld by the High Court. The petitioner is himself to blame for the situation in which he finds himself in this lis.

5. Resultantly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.