MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and others vs LIAQAT ALI and others

ORDER

' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---This petition is directed against order, dated 15-10-1998 of the Lahore High Court, through which civil revision filed by the petitioner against the order of trial Court dismissing his application, seeking amendment of original application made under section 12(2), C.P.C. Has been disposed of with the observation regarding the facts mentioned in the application, seeking amendment to the effect that the petitioner may lead evidence but subject to its admissibility under the law.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that since these facts were not elaborately stated in the original application under section 12(2), C.P.C. Therefore, the respondents may raise objection that no evidence could be led regarding those facts which though were not new facts but only ;implication or details of the plea of fraud raised in the original amplification, as such the petitioner may be put to inconnivance, therefore, application moved by them seeking amendment of the original application to incorporate those facts in the same should have been allowed so that the respondent may also have opportunity of meeting the same and lead evidence in order to do complete justice

3. The argument of learned counsel for petitioners has considerable force. In the original application the petitioners had clearly and specifically stated that the consent decree dated 16-10- 1995 had been obtained through fraud and in collusion between the respondents Nos.1 and 2 who were real brothers in order to cause damage to the sale of land made by respondent No,2 in favour of petitioner through Mutation No,1697, dated 31-10-1995. The consent decree is dated 16-10-1995.

The petitioners want to raise plea that fraud had also been committed in collusion with the staff of the civil Court as these dates had been anti-dated in order to show that the decree was passed earlier to the sale of the land in favour of the petitioner. In order to substantiate his this plea to justify need for amendment it was pointed out that the civil suit was registered at Serial No,372-A whereas according to the practice The civil suits are entered in the relevant register against regular serial numbers and allotment of number as 372-A was made to the suit in order to enter the same in between Serial Nos.372 and 373 on 2-10-1995 in order to show that the same had been filed on the said date which in fact was not filed on the said date. It was also pointed out that though the civil Court according to its order had directed respondent No,1/plaintiff to make up deficiency in the court-fee within one month i.e, upto 2-11-1995 according to the order, dated 2-10- 1995 allegedly passed consent decree was passed on 16-10-1995 in haste.

4. The pleas raised in the application seeking amendment are actually the amplification of the plea of fraud already made in the main petition, therefore, the argument of learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioners wanted to set up a case different from the case already made out is not correct and is hereby repelled. Learned Judge of the High Court it appears was satisfied with this approach as the petitioners were granted permission as per observations made by him to produce evidence on those facts but a condition was attached that the same should be admissible, therefore, in order to avoid any further confusion that evidence on those facts may be objected to as inadmissible, therefore, it was necessary to grant permission to amend the application so that the respondents could also have full opportunity to meet the same in order to do complete justice. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties we are of the view that the amendment sought by the petitioners was such which should have been allowed in order to do complete justice and decide the controversy arising between the parties conclusively and effectively.

5. For the foregoing reasons this petition is converted into appeal, order, dated 15-10-1998 of the Lahore High Court, and order, dated 13-9-1997 of the trial Court rejecting the application of the petitioners seeking amendment are hereby set aside. Application moved by the petitioners dated 5-5-1995 seeking permission for amendment of the original application, made under section 12(2), C.P.C. Is allowed. The trial Court shall fix a date for filing the amendment application and after obtaining reply it shall proceed to decide the same in accordance with law.

6. There will, however, be no order as to costs.