Wednesday 31 October 2012

Can list of witnesses be changed?

Citation Name  : 2012  YLR  2231     SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
  Side Appellant : FIRDOS BAKHAT
  Side Opponent : JAVED KHAN




S. 5, Sched. & S.14(1)---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S.42---Suit for dissolution of marriage---Application for production of list of witnesses---Plaintiff who filed suit for dissolution of marriage against defendant also appended a list of witnesses---Plaintiff who could not produce witnesses mentioned in the list, filed another list of witnesses, which was finally allowed and the Trial Court recorded statements of said witnesses and only the statement of plaintiff was yet to be recorded in the suit---Said order of Family Court allowing the second list was challenged by the defendant in the Shariat Court through an appeal ---Shariat Court accepted the appeal and set aside the order of Family Court---Contention of counsel for the plaintiff was that impugned order of Family Court being interlocutory order and not a final judgment, appeal filed by the defendant before Shariat Court, was liable to be dismissed, because no appeal lay against an interlocutory order---Contention of counsel for defendant was that order passed by the Family Court was final order and appeal before Supreme Court was competent---Validity---Application filed by the plaintiff for allowing her to produce some other witnesses was accepted by the Family Court; and that order was an interlocutory order and could not be a final judgment---appeal against said order was not maintainable before the Shariat Court---Under provisions of S.14(1) of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Family Courts Act, 1993, only decision or decree of Family Court was appeal able before the Shariat Court---Findings of Shariat Court that application filed by the plaintiff before the Family Court was a review application; and that Family Court had no jurisdiction to entertain such application, was contrary to record---Application filed by the plaintiff for summoning witnesses, was not a review application, but was an application for production of witnesses---After acceptance of said application, statements of witnesses summoned, had already been recorded by the Trial Court---After said development, whole subsequent practice had become futile and academic; even on merit---Judgment of Shariat Court, was set aside by Supreme Court in circumstances.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Contact Lawyers Network

If you have any queries related with this post you can contact at lawyergolra@gmail.com

Regards,
Salman Yousaf Khan
CEO
Lawyers Network
+92-333-5339880