Skip to main content

Dismissal of Suit under Order 17 Rule 3 of CPC is Revisionable

By


When plaintiff fails to produce evidence in the court after given proper
opportunity to be heard the suit of plaintiff is dismissed under order
17 rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908. This dismissal can be done by
a court in the presence or absence of the plaintiff.


When a suit is dismissed on the non production of evidence, it cannot be
restored by the court dismissing it. There is no appeal against the
dismissal of same order by the court. The only remedy against such
dismissal order is revision which is filed in the appellate court.


Revision is filed under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In
revision to such dismissal the appellate court has powers to either
dismiss the revision or accept the same. When revision petition is
accepted the suit is restored and plaintiff is given opportunity to
provide evidence in the court accordingly.

If you have any query related to any suit you can contact internationallawyerinfo@gmail.com


Regards,
Salman Yousaf Khan (Golra)
International Lawyer
+92-333-5339880
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Entrustment of property and dishonest misappropriation of entrusted property

By
  PLJ 2026 SC 96 [Appellate Jurisdiction] Present:   Sardar Tariq Masood and Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, JJ. AYESHA TAYYAB--Petitioner versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION CANTT.DISTRICT SIALKOT, etc.--Respondents C.P. No. 1575 of 2024, decided on 22.5.2025. (On appeal against the order dated 08.03.2024 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No. 1684 of 2024) Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 406--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199(1)(a)(ii)--Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898), S. 561-A--Quashment of criminal proceedings and Quashment of FIR--Entrustment of property and dishonest   misappropriation   of   entrusted   property--“Qarz-e-Hasna”--Amount was handed over as a loan/trust--High Court observed that no offence under section 406 PPC was made out from contents of FIR and proceeded to quash same under its constitutional jurisdiction conferred by Article 199--Contents of FIR determine whether a cogni...
Post a Comment
Read more

Co-sharer

By
Possession of one co-sharer in possession of all . 1998 MLD 857, 1857; 2006 YLR 831; 2008 SCMR 661, 616; 2008 SCMR 905. Co-sharer to establish right of co-heirship . 2008 MLD 278.  For  more , you can consult omara.khan789@gmail.com or call +923123450006
Post a Comment
Read more

Prosecution should be afforded fair opportunity of trial

By
  PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 42 [Balochistan High Court, Quetta] Present:  Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail and Rozi Khan Barrech, JJ. Dr.  MUHAMMAD ARIF--Appellant versus MUHAMMAD ANWAR and 3 others--Respondents Crl. Acq. A. No. 461 of 2019, decided on 21.12.2020. Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----Ss. 265-K, 249-A & 417(2)--Jurisdiction u/S. 265-K, Cr.P.C.--Exercise of powers--Appeal against acquittal--The object of exercise of powers is to prevent abuse of law available to learned trial Court under sections 265-K and 249-A of Cr.P.C., however, in a case where sufficient, prima facie, evidence is available, powers may not be exercised as to throttle process of justice--The primary consideration to be kept in view would be whether continuance of proceedings before could be a futile exercise, wastage of time and abuse of process of Court or not--If on basis of facts admitted and a patent on record no offence can be made out, then it would amount to abuse of proc...
Post a Comment
Read more