DNA Test in Family Matter

DNA Test in Family Matter

Section 7 family court act, Art. 128 of Qanoon Shahadat order 1984—— DNA Test—Scope—Suit for recovery of dowry articles— Dower amount and maintenance for herself  and for mniors was filed by respondent wife and the same was pending trail before family court— Petitioner/husband during pendency of the suit disowned two miors daughters and sought permission to condict DNA Test—Application of petitioner /husband was dismissed by family court as wella s by lower appellate court—Validtiy— Birth certificates of two minors girls were brought on record which depicted that both mionrs girls were born when plaintiff was legally wedded wife of the defendant and he did not dispute the same— Plea that minors girls were not born out of the wedlock of parties was raised for the first time in weitten statement—Nothing was brought on record from the side of petitoner/husband to establish that he had disputed legitimacy of children soon after their birth—Petitoiner /husband remained silent till he filed written statement in the suit. DNA Test was always conducted with the consent of the person concerned and no such consent was available. Once consent was not given DNA Test could not be conducted—High Court declined to interfere in orders passed by two courts below. Constitutional Petition was dismissed in circumstances

2017 PLD Lahore 892

Defamation Damages Jurisdiction

Section 13 of Defamation Ordinance 2002, Order VII Rule 10 CPC—Defamation—Damages— Jurisdiction of Civil Court— Plaint return of – scope— Civil Court accepted application under O.VII Rule 10 CPC and returned the plaint—Contention of Plaintiff was that it was option of the aggrieved person to avail remedy by filing suit under section 9 of CPC or under Defamation Ordinance 2002—Validity—Civil court was court of ultimate jurisdiction—Neither there was any repealing clause nor ouster of jurisdiction of civil court to try the suit filed before in with regard to damages on account of defamation—If in respect of same dispute/litigation general law and special law were in field, special law would prevail subject to condition that special law contained provisions of ouster of jurisdiction of civil courts— aggrieved person therefore, had option either to opt for redressal against defamatory action before court of general jurisdiction i.e civil court or under the special law—jurisdiction of civil court covered all kinds of civil litigation on the strength and force of section 9 CPC. Plaintiff had availed the option of the civil court but his plaint was returned while misinterpreting the law—impugned order was not sustainable in circumstances which was set aside and matter was remanded for decision afresh in accordance with law—Appeal was allowed accordingly.

PLD 2017 Lahore 884

Pleader is entitled to appear for another and not for himself

Counsel and Client

Advocate and Pleader— Scope— Pleader is entitled to appear for another and not for himself—- If one wants to represent his/her client as advocate then he (advocate) is not legally entitled to examine himself in place of his party (client) as for such purpose he has to unclothe his status as advocate and has to clothe with attorney/authorized agent.

2017 CLC 1736

Negligence of counsel did not constitute sufficient cause

Negligence of counsel did not constitute sufficient cause 

Parties are bound by the acts and omissions of their counsel

in ase of any negligence on party of the counsel, parties could not claim that they were not to be held responsible.

Negligence on the party of advocate, has a binding effect on his client— any negligence on the party of the advocate, was binding upon party which had engaged the advocate— if pary would engage a counsel who was lacking sense of responsibility to the court, it was the party who should suffer and not the other side.

PLJ 2015 Islamabad 74

2013 YLR 375

2013 CLC 254

PLD 2006 Karachi 252

1974 SCMR 223

Judgment of foreign courts

Judgment of foreign courts

Section 12 judicial comity, doctrine of —- courts in Pakistan should respect and give effect to (subject to certain exceptions) the judicial decisions of other countries on the same subject under the principle of judicial Comity— foreign judgments were conclusive as to any matter thereby adjudicated upon and courts in Pakistan must recognize and enforce the same however before enforcing andy foreign judgment a court in Pakistan would have to ensure that it did not fall within any of the exception contained in section 13 CPC

2017 PLD 174 Supreme Court of Pakistan