Mst. Noor Begum vs Fazal Muhammad Tariq and others
This review petition was filed against an order dated 1.12.1999 passed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which had remanded a case to the Civil Judge with directions to amend the plaint to include a prayer for possession. The petitioner contended that the original suit already sought the relief of possession, rendering the court's previous direction for amendment redundant. Upon review of the plaint, the Court confirmed that the relief of possession was indeed already claimed in the original suit. Consequently, the Court held that the previous direction for amendment was unnecessary and erroneous. The Court allowed the review petition to the extent of recalling the specific direction regarding the amendment of the plaint. The principle established is that where a court's prior order is based on a factual misconception regarding the contents of the pleadings, the court has the authority to review and recall such directions upon the error being demonstrated.
- Can a court recall a direction in a previous order if it is based on a factual misconception regarding the pleadings?
- Is an amendment to a plaint necessary if the relief of possession is already claimed in the original suit?
FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.--- The petitioner seeks review of order dated 1.12.1999 passed by this Court whereby Civil Petition No. 848-L of 1999 was disposed of and the case was remanded to the Civil Judge with certain directions.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the original suit filed by the petitioner was already for possession of the suit property. Therefore, further direction by this Court for making the amendment in the plaint adding the relief of possession of property was not necessary. The learned counsel for the respondent could not controvert the factual position taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length. We also find from the plaint that the suit of the petitioner is already for possession of the suit property. In this view of the matter, the direction given in our order dated 1.12.1999 passed in Civil Petition No. 848-L of 1998 for amending the plaint is recalled. This review petition is allowed to this extent. .