BR100 Increased By (0.01%)
BR30 Increased By (0.53%)
KSE100 Increased By (0.28%)
KSE30 Increased By (0.29%)
AGHA 6.38 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.95%)
BECO 4.35 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (1.87%)
BML 62.55 Increased By ▲ 0.10 (0.16%)
BOP 31.39 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (0.51%)
CNERGY 11.73 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (1.21%)
CSIL 5.91 Increased By ▲ 0.19 (3.32%)
FCCL 61.71 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (0.28%)
FFL 14.79 Decreased By ▼ -0.23 (-1.53%)
FNEL 1.24 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.81%)
KEL 6.32 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.96%)
KOSM 5.90 Increased By ▲ 0.34 (6.12%)
LOTCHEM 24.69 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.04%)
MLCF 103.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.15 (-0.14%)
NBP 173.32 Decreased By ▼ -1.96 (-1.12%)
NCPL 51.83 Decreased By ▼ -0.94 (-1.78%)
NPL 54.03 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.17%)
OGDC 315.87 Increased By ▲ 2.48 (0.79%)
PACE 9.26 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.65%)
PAEL 35.58 Decreased By ▼ -0.22 (-0.61%)
PIBTL 13.66 Increased By ▲ 0.19 (1.41%)
PPL 226.07 Increased By ▲ 4.26 (1.92%)
PRL 80.28 Increased By ▲ 1.20 (1.52%)
PTC 46.64 Decreased By ▼ -0.21 (-0.45%)
SSGC 23.82 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.21%)
TBL 9.24 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.75%)
TELE 7.55 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (2.17%)
TPL 24.54 Decreased By ▼ -0.57 (-2.27%)
TPLP 12.99 Increased By ▲ 0.48 (3.84%)
TREET 25.98 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-1.03%)
TRG 53.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-0.21%)

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 for this article.