AIRLINK 196.38 Increased By ▲ 4.54 (2.37%)
BOP 10.11 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (2.43%)
CNERGY 7.75 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (1.04%)
FCCL 38.10 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (0.63%)
FFL 15.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.13%)
FLYNG 24.54 Decreased By ▼ -0.77 (-3.04%)
HUBC 130.38 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (0.16%)
HUMNL 13.73 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (1.03%)
KEL 4.60 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-1.5%)
KOSM 6.19 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.32%)
MLCF 44.85 Increased By ▲ 0.56 (1.26%)
OGDC 206.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.36 (-0.17%)
PACE 6.58 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.3%)
PAEL 39.77 Decreased By ▼ -0.78 (-1.92%)
PIAHCLA 17.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.39 (-2.22%)
PIBTL 7.99 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.99%)
POWER 9.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.43%)
PPL 178.91 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (0.2%)
PRL 38.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.15 (-0.38%)
PTC 24.31 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (0.7%)
SEARL 109.27 Increased By ▲ 1.42 (1.32%)
SILK 1.00 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (3.09%)
SSGC 37.75 Decreased By ▼ -1.36 (-3.48%)
SYM 18.83 Decreased By ▼ -0.29 (-1.52%)
TELE 8.53 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.81%)
TPLP 12.14 Decreased By ▼ -0.23 (-1.86%)
TRG 64.76 Decreased By ▼ -1.25 (-1.89%)
WAVESAPP 12.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.67 (-5.24%)
WTL 1.64 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-3.53%)
YOUW 3.87 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-2.03%)
BR100 12,000 Increased By 69.2 (0.58%)
BR30 35,548 Decreased By -112 (-0.31%)
KSE100 114,256 Increased By 1049.3 (0.93%)
KSE30 35,870 Increased By 304.3 (0.86%)

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) held receiving any document without oath statements of advocates and then marking them as exhibits can cause a miscarriage of justice.

The court said prejudice must not be caused to the litigants because of any mistake of the courts though the litigants and their counsel are also required to be vigilant.

The court passed this order in a petition of Mst Afia Ambrine challenging the ex-parte judgment and decree passed by a lower court based on alleged bogus death certificates. It said the superior courts have repeatedly observed that receiving of any document without oath statements of advocates and then marking them as exhibits, deprives the opponent party of their right to cross-examine the documents in question.

It said the documents which are marked as exhibits without oath statements of the advocates can result into the possibility to prejudice the interest of the parties to the suit. It allowed the petition and said that the impugned orders had been passed without proper application of judicial mind. It is the duty of the courts to adhere to the settled law, the court added.

The court observed that the revision court though noticed that the trial court acted in purely mechanical manners but without looking into the record and appreciating the stage of the case proceeded to uphold the decision of the trial court.

It said orders to exhibit and then to de-exhibit have been passed not merely ignoring the Code and the QSO but at the same time the repeated observation of the Supreme Court as well as this court.

It set aside the orders of the trial court marking the documents as exhibits without oath statements of the advocate and then ordered to de-exhibit them as well as.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.