In The Court of 1St Senior Civil Judge, Nawabshah

IN THE COURT OF 1ST SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NAWABSHAH.
F.C.SUIT NO. 55 OF 2010
Abdul Salam
Versus.
.Plaintiff.
Mst. Khair-u-Nisa & Others

..Defendants.
OBJECTION TO APPLICATION U/O 9 RULE 9 CPC

IN SHAPE OF COUNTER AFFIDAVIT.
I,
Muhammad Farooque son of Muhammad Anwaar Ansari,
adult, muslim, r/o: Essarpura, Opposite Rao Khalid Patrol Pump

Nawabshah, do hereby state on Solemn affirmation as under:-
1.
That I am defendant No.2, hence fully conversant with the facts

of the same.
2).
That I have gone through application U/O 9 Rule 9 CPC along

with supporting affidavit filed by the plaintiff and after
understanding the same I say that the contents thereof are
incorrect , hence denied.
3).
That plaintiff has remained indolent to pursue his suit and law
help the vigilant and not indolent.
4).
That no cogent reason whatsoever has been asserted in the

application as well as in the affidavit of the plaintiff.
5).
That no injury would be sustained if the suit is not restored.
6).
That justice requires that application U/O 9 Rule 9 CPC may

be dismissed with special costs to be awarded to me.
Whatever stated above is true and correct to the best of

knowledge and belief.
Deponent.
I know the deponent.
Advocate.

F.C. SUIT NO. 406 OF 2011
Muhammad RafiPlaintiff.
Versus.
Muhammad Wasi & Others... Defendants.
APPLICATION U/O 9 RULE 7 CPC
It is prayed on behalf of the defendants No.1 to 5, that

this Honourable Court may be pleased to set-aside/ Re-Call order of
striking of defendants dated: 20-11-2012, debarring them from filling
Written Statement and defendants may be allowed to file their Written
Statement, on consideration of the grounds mentioned in the
accompanying affidavit.
This prayer is made in the interest of justice.
ADVOCATE FOR,
DEFENDANTS No. 1& 5.
Nawabshah.
Dated:

Nadeem Malik
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
Ghulam Hussain & Others
..Defendants.

It is prayed on behalf of the plaintiff that this honourable
Court may be pleased to set aside the order dated 10-04-2010 passed
by this honourable Court for dismissal of the suit for non prosecution
and restore it on its original file on the consideration of the grounds
mentioned in accompanying affidavit.
Nawabshah.
Dated: 07.05.2010
ADVOCATE FOR
PLAINTIFF.

Nadeem Malik
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
..Defendants.
A F F I D A V I T.
I, Nadeem Malik son of Abdul Majeed Malik, muslim adult , r/o
House No 81/127, Mariam Road, VIP colony Nawabshah, do hereby
state on Solemn affirmation as under:1.
That I am plaintiff and hence fully conversant with the facts of
the same.
2.
That on date of hearing my advocate had gone to Karachi to
appear before the Honourable High Court Sindh and application in
this regard also moved.
3.
That at the time of call I was little bid late to appear, otherwise
I came to attend the Honourable Court.
4.
That non appearance in the case neither intentional nor
deliberate but due to the reason aforesaid.
5.
That my valuable rights are involved in the matter, hence it
shall be proper and necessary that matter may be decided on merits
in spite of technicalities.
6.
That it shall be in the interest of justice that my application
may be allowed and if the same is not allowed we shall suffer
irreparably.
7.
That application is within time.

Deponent.

Advocate.

F.C. SUIT NO. 56 OF 2011.
Mst. Majida KhatoonPlaintiff.
Versus.
Syed Tahir Hussain and Others... Defendants.
It is prayed on behalf of the plaintiff that this Honble

court may be pleased to set-aside/ Re-Call the order dated
23.10.2012 passed by this Honble court for dismissal of above suit
for non prosecution and restore it on its original file on the
consideration of the grounds mentioned in the accompanying
affidavit.
ADVOCATE FOR
Plaintiff.
Nawabshah.
Dated:

Versus.
A F F I D A V I T.
I,
Muhammad Wasi son Nanay Mian, adult, Muslim, r/o: Sanghar
Road Near Ghulam Qadir Baloch Shop, Line Par Nawabshah, District
Shaheed Benazir Abad, do hereby state on Solemn affirmation as under:-
1).
That I am defendant No. 1, in the above suit and am aware of the
facts involved in the above matter.

2).
That accompanying application for re-calling order dated: 20-11-2012,
striking of defence has been drafted my instructions and same may be

treated as a part and parcel of this affidavit to avoid repetition.
3).
That I was ailing and getting treatment at Karachi, hence could not
present my self on the date of hearing viz 20-11-2012, so that the Written
Statement could have been filed by my advocate, as in the Written Statement
my verification was mentioned about the contents.
4).
That our valuable rights are involved in the matter, and if
accompanying application is not allowed, we shall suffer, sustain irreparable

loss and injury.
5).
That justice requires that the matter may kindly be decided on merits
rather than technicalities, therefore, by allowing accompanying application.

We may given opportunity to file Written Statement.
Whatever stated above is true and correct to the best of knowledge
and belief.
Deponent.
Advocate.

Versus.

this Honourable Court may be pleased to set-aside/ Re-Call order of
striking of defendants dated: 20-11-2012, debarring them from filling
Written Statement and defendants may be allowed to file their Written
Statement, on consideration of the grounds mentioned in the
ADVOCATE FOR
DEFENDANTS No. 1& 5.
Nawabshah.
Dated:
IN THE COURT OF IST. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NAWABSHAH

F.C. Suit NO. 327 of 2010
Gullan & Others
. Plaintiffs
Versus.
Govt. of Sindh & Others
..Respondent.
APPLICATION U/S 148 CPC.
It is prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased

to adjourn the matter and enlarge time for producing the evidence as
due to death of near relatives of the plaintiffs they could not be able
to appear before the Honourable Court.
Advocate for plaintiff.

Nawabshah.
Dated:
IN THE COURT OF 2ND. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,

SHAHEED BENAZIR ABAD.
Family Appeal No.
of 2010
Muhammad Ashique
.Appellant
Versus.
Mst. Allah Rakhi

..Respondent.

R/W R 12 OF WEST PAKISTAN FAMILY COURT
RULE 1965
It is prayed on behalf of the appellant
that this
Honourable Court may be pleased to re-admit the appeal and decide

the same on merits after hearing both the parties, on the
consideration of the grounds mentioned in accompanying affidavit.
ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT.

Nawabshah.
Dated:

Versus.
A F F I D A V I T.
I, Muhammad Wasi son of Nanay Mian, adult, Muslim, r/o: Sanghar
Road Near Ghulam Qadir Baloch Shop, Line Par Nawabshah,
District
Shaheed Benazir Abad, do hereby state on Solemn affirmation as under:1).
That I am defendant No. 1, in the above suit and am aware of the
facts involved in the above matter.

2).
That accompanying application for re-calling order dated: 20-11-2012,
striking of defence has been drafted my instructions and same may be

treated as a part and parcel of this affidavit to avoid repetition.
3).
That I was ailing and getting treatment at Karachi, hence could not
present my self on the date of hearing viz 20-11-2012, so that the Written
Statement could have been filed by my advocate, as in the Written Statement
my verification was mentioned about the contents.
4).
That our valuable rights are involved in the matter, and if
accompanying application is not allowed, We shall suffer, sustain irreparable

loss and injury.
5).
That justice requires that the matter may kindly be decided on merits
rather than technicalities, therefore, by allowing accompanying application

We may given opportunity to file Written Statement.
Whatever stated above is true and correct to the best of knowledge
and belief.

Advocate.
Deponent.

F.C. SUIT NO.
Shadi Khan Lashari
90
OF 2010
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
The Executive Engineer Irrigation & Others

..Defendants.

this Honourable Court may be pleased to set-aside exparte order
dated: 11.12.2010, for closing the side of the defendants and
defendants No.1 to 5, may be allowed to file their Written Statement ,
as the valuable rights are involved in the matter which requires to be
decided on merits.
ADVOCATE FOR
DEFENDANTS No. 1 to 5.
Nawabshah.
Dated: 12.01.2011

F.C. SUIT NO.
01
Ali Asghar Rind
OF 2010
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
Ghulam Rasool & another
..Defendants.

It is prayed on behalf of the applicant that this
Honourable Court may be pleased to re-called / set aside the order
dated 10-12-2010 passed by this Honourable Court for dismissal of
the Contempt Application for non prosecution and restore it on its
original file on the consideration of the grounds mentioned in
ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANT.
Nawabshah.
Dated:

F.C. SUIT NO.
01
Ali Asghar Rind
OF 2010
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
Ghulam Rasool & another
..Defendants.
A F F I D A V I T.
I, Ali Asghar son of Haji Ghulam Nabi Rind, adult, muslim, r/o:
village Haji Ghulam Nabi Rind, near Sakrand Town, Taluka Sakrand,
District
Shaheed
Benazir
Abad,
do
hereby
state
on
Solemn
affirmation as under:-
1.
That I am applicant in the aforesaid contempt application and
hence fully conversant with the facts of the same.

2.
That on date of hearing viz. 10.12.2010, my advocate was
present before this Honourable Court, but meanwhile he was called

by learned 3rd. Additional Sessions Judge, Shaheed Benazir Abad,
where a case bearing Sessions Case No.
of
2008, State Versus
Shah Nawaz Chanar was proceeded with and after becoming free
there from he appeared before the Honourable Court, where upon he
came to know that the contempt application has been dismissed for
non-prosecution, though he was all along ready to argue the matter
and even he appeared before this Honourable Court on the said date
of hearing.
3).
That the order of non-prosecution in the above matter is
unwarranted by law and the said order is shown to have been passed
at 11:45 am , while the time of the Honourable Court is upto 2:30
PM.
4).
That the non-appearance at the time when the matter was
called on the part of my advocate is neither intentional nor deliberate

but due to the reasons aforesaid.
P/2
P/2
5).
That even the matter of contempt of court is in between the
contemnors and the Honourable Court, therefore, the same was to be

decided on merits rather than technicalities, as the prestige and
honour of this Honourable Court was involved in the matter because
of non obliging the Judgment and Decree Passed by this Honourable
Court by the contemnors/ opponents.
6).
That
Justice
requires,
that
the
said
order
viz.
dated:
10.12.2010, may be set-aside/recalled and the contempt application

may be decided on merits.
7).

Deponent.
Advocate.

Abdul Salam
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
Mst. Khair-u-Nisa & Others
..Defendants.
OBJECTION TO APPLICATION U/O 9 RULE 9 CPC

IN SHAPE OF COUNTER AFFIDAVIT.
I,
Muhammad Farooque son of Muhammad Anwaar Ansari,
adult, muslim, r/o: Essarpura, Opposite Rao Khalid Patrol Pump

Nawabshah, do hereby state on Solemn affirmation as under:-
1.
That I am defendant No.2, hence fully conversant with the facts

of the same.
2).
That I have gone through application U/O 9 Rule 9 CPC along

with supporting affidavit filed by the plaintiff and after
understanding the same I say that the contents thereof are
incorrect , hence denied.
3).
That plaintiff has remained indolent to pursue his suit and law
help the vigilant and not indolent.
4).
That no cogent reason whatsoever has been asserted in the

application as well as in the affidavit of the plaintiff.
5).
That no injury would be sustained if the suit is not restored.
6).
That justice requires that application U/O 9 Rule 9 CPC may

be dismissed with special costs to be awarded to me.

Deponent.
Advocate.

Nadeem Malik
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
..Defendants.

Nawabshah.
ADVOCATE FOR
PLAINTIFF.
Dated: 07.05.2010

Nadeem Malik
Versus.
.Plaintiff.

..Defendants.
A F F I D A V I T.
I, Nadeem Malik son of Abdul Majeed Malik, muslim adult , r/o
House No 81/127, Mariam Road, VIP colony Nawabshah, do hereby
state on Solemn affirmation as under:1.
the same.
2.
That on date of hearing my advocate had gone to Karachi to
appear before the Honourable High Court Sindh and application in
this regard also moved.
3.
That at the time of call I was little bid late to appear, otherwise
I came to attend the Honourable Court.
4.
That non appearance in the case neither intentional nor
deliberate but due to the reason aforesaid.
5.
That my valuable rights are involved in the matter, hence it
shall be proper and necessary that matter may be decided on merits
in spite of technicalities.
6.
irreparably.
7.


Deponent.
Advocate.
APPLICATION U/O 9 RULE 9, CPC

It is prayed on behalf of legal representatives of plaintiff
namely Mst. Zainab D/O Peer Bux r/o: Village Bhirya Road, Union
council Bhirya Road, Taluka Bhirya City, District N. Feroze and
Abdullah @ Muhammad Fazil S/O Peer Bux r/o: house constructed
on Plots Nos. 487, 492, 493, Cahki Para Tando Adam, Taluka Tando
Adam, District Sanghar, that this Honourable Court may be pleased
set aside the order dated 05-10-09 dismissing the suit for non
prosecution and restore it on its original file and join them as Plaintiff
(a) and (b) as Legal Representatives of plaintiff, on the consideration
of the grounds mentioned in accompanying affidavit.
ADVOCATE FOR L.Rs

PLAINTIFF.
Tando Adam
Dated:
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, TANDO ADAM

Peer Bakhsh @ Peero Dhoron

.Plaintiff.
Versus.
Ali Raza & Others
..Defendants.
A F F I D A V I T.
I, Abdullah @ Muhammad Fazil son of Peer Bakhash @ Peero

Dhoron, adult, muslim, r/o: house constructed on Plots Nos. 487,
492, 493, Cahki Para Tando Adam, Taluka Tando Adam, District
Sanghar, do hereby state on Solemn affirmation as under:-
1).
That I am one of the legal heirs of the plaintiff and hence fully
conversant with the facts of the suit.

2).
That my father filed above suit, and later on executed Special
Power of Attorney in favour of Muhammad Achar son of Kareem Dino
to pursue the suit which was being proceeded and pursued before the
Honourable Court.
3).
That my father died on 28.08.2009 and we were under bonafide
impression that suit was being pursued and proceeded with properly
but all of sudden attorney of my late father informed us
on
05.10.2009, that his attorney-ship has been ceased off and the suit
has been dismissed for non-prosecution despite of submission of
intimation to the Honourable Court but the Honourable Court
neither issued any notice nor awaited for the time prescribed U/A
176 of Limitation Act, 1908 for moving such application on our part,
hence the suit is liable to be restored on its original file and we may
be joined as plaintiff (a) and (b) in the suit being the legal heirs of the
plaintiff.
P/2
P/2
4).
That copy of death certificate of the plaintiff is submitted
herewith, for kind consideration.

5).
That absence of the legal heir of plaintiff was not intentional
one and was due to the reasons aforesaid.

6).
That valuable rights of the legal heirs of the plaintiff are
involved in the suit , therefore, by avoiding technicalities the suit may

be allowed to be decided on merits.
7).
That the application is within time.
8).
That we were under bonafide impression that suit was being
proceeded with therefore, the application was not filed on our part,
otherwise we would have filed application for making us as party in

the suit.
9).

irreparably.

Deponent.
Advocate.


.Plaintiff.
Versus.
Ali Raza & Others
..Defendants.
APPLICATION U/O 9 RULE 9, U/O 22

RULE 3 CPC R/W SECTION 151 CPC
It is prayed on behalf of legal representatives of plaintiff
namely Mst. Zainab D/O Peer Bux r/o: Village Bhirya Road, Union
council Bhirya Road, Taluka Bhirya City, District N. Feroze and
Abdullah @ Muhammad Fazil S/O Peer Bux r/o: house constructed
on Plots Nos. 487, 492, 493, Cahki Para Tando Adam, Taluka Tando
Adam, District Sanghar, that this Honourable Court may be pleased
set aside the order dated 05-10-09 dismissing the suit for non
prosecution and restore it on its original file and join them as Plaintiff
(a) and (b) as Legal Representatives of plaintiff, on the consideration
of the grounds mentioned in accompanying affidavit.
Tando Adam
Dated:
ADVOCATE FOR L.Rs

PLAINTIFF.

.Plaintiff.
Versus.
Ali Raza & Others
..Defendants.
A F F I D A V I T.
I, Abdullah @ Muhammad Fazil son of Peer Bakhash @ Peero

Dhoron, adult, muslim, r/o: house constructed on Plots Nos. 487,
492, 493, Cahki Para Tando Adam, Taluka Tando Adam, District
Sanghar, do hereby state on Solemn affirmation as under:-
1).
That I am one of the legal heirs of the plaintiff and hence fully
conversant with the facts of the suit.

2).
That my father filed above suit, and later on executed Special
Power of Attorney in favour of Muhammad Achar son of Kareem Dino

to pursue the suit which was being proceeded and pursued before the
Honourable Court.
3).
That my father died on 28.08.2009 and we were under bonafide
impression that suit was being pursued and proceeded with properly
but all of sudden attorney of my late father informed us
on
05.10.2009, that his attorney-ship has been ceased off and the suit
has been dismissed for non-prosecution despite of submission of
intimation to the Honourable Court but the Honourable Court
neither issued any notice nor awaited for the time prescribed U/A
176 of Limitation Act, 1908 for moving such application on our part,
hence the suit is liable to be restored on its original file and we may
be joined as plaintiff (a) and (b) in the suit being the legal heirs of the
plaintiff.
P/2
P/2
4).
That copy of death certificate of the plaintiff is submitted
herewith, for kind consideration.

5).
That absence of the legal heir of plaintiff was not intentional
one and was due to the reasons aforesaid.

6).
That valuable rights of the legal heirs of the plaintiff are
involved in the suit , therefore, by avoiding technicalities the suit may

be allowed to be decided on merits.
7).
That the application is within time.
8).
That we were under bonafide impression that suit was being
proceeded with therefore, the application was not filed on our part,
otherwise we would have filed application for making us as party in
the suit.
9).

irreparably.

Deponent.
Advocate.
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE & JUDICIAL MAGISTRATEIII NAWABSHAH.

T.C.SUIT NO. 20 OF 2006.
11 OF 2008
PTCL through Its DE,
Nawabshah.
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
Muhammad Yousif Bhatti
..Defendant.
REPLICATION
I, Ali Sher Keerio, Divisional Engineer Operation, PTCL,
Nawabshah, do hereby state on Solemn affirmation as under:1).
the same.
2).
That I have been read over the contents of objections to my
application U/O 9 rule 9 CPC in shape of counter affidavit filed by

plaintiff and after going through the same I say the contents there
are incorrect, hence denied.
3).
That the matter was being adjourned on different grounds
besides the strikes of advocates and the matters could not be

proceeded properly.
4).
That it is denied that we are not interested in proceedings with
the matter on the other hand we are ready to proceed with the matter
if the same is restored on its original file.
5).
That it is denied that Mr. Fazal Din Baloch Revenue Officer,
was not authorized in the case but due to different pretext the matter
was adjourned, that is why , the matter was not proceeded, however,
we are ready to get our evidence recorded without any fail.
P/2
P/2
6).
That our valuable rights are involved in the suit as the plaintiff
has obtained the same amount twice by playing fraud not only with
PTCL but also with the Honourable Court as on the one hand he
obtained the amount through the Decree of the court and on the
other hand he received the amount from the company keeping them
in darkness taking the undue advantage of being our legal advisor
and that authority was misused by him.
7).
That it will be in the interest of justice to opportunity to lead
evidence may be given so that the matter may be decided on merits

rather than technicalities.

Advocate.
Deponent.

11 OF 2008
Nawabshah.
Versus.
.Plaintiff.

..Defendant.

PLAINTIFF.
Nawabshah.
Dated: 05.12.2008
ADVOCATE FOR

11 OF 2008
Nawabshah.
.Plaintiff.
Versus.
..Defendant.
A F F I D A V I T.
I, Ali Sher Keerio, Divisional Engineer Operation, PTCL,
Nawabshah, do hereby state on Solemn affirmation as under:1.
That I am plaintiff and hence fully
the same.
2.
That my predecessor filed the
Nawabshah, in which Revenue Officer
authorized to pursue the case, he
accordingly.
conversant with the facts of

suit on behalf of PTCL,
Mr. Fazal Din Baloch was
was attending the court
3.
That due to retirement of Mr. Fazal Din no other person could
be authorized to pursue the suit due to obtaining approval from
higher authorities, meanwhile the suit was dismissed for non
prosecution.
4.
That according to the daily case dairies of the Honourable
court both parties were present in the court on 07-04-2008, 19-052008, 26-07-2008 and 25-10-2008.
5.
That absence of the plaintiff was not intentional one and was
due to the reasons aforesaid.
6.
That valuable rights of the plaintiffs company are involved, for
obtaining the payment of legal fees by defendant not only from the
company but also through the court twicely, the same amount, which
needs evidence, therefore, the plaintiff may be given opportunity to
proceed with the case, so that it may be decided on merits, rather
than technicalities.
7.
irreparably.
Deponent.
Advocate.

In The Court of 1St Senior Civil Judge, Nawabshah

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In The Court of 1St Senior Civil Judge, Nawabshah

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE COURT OF 1ST SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NAWABSHAH.

F.C.SUIT NO. 55 OF 2010

Mst. Khair-u-Nisa & Others

OBJECTION TO APPLICATION U/O 9 RULE 9 CPC

Muhammad Farooque son of Muhammad Anwaar Ansari,

adult, muslim, r/o: Essarpura, Opposite Rao Khalid Patrol Pump

That I am defendant No.2, hence fully conversant with the facts

That I have gone through application U/O 9 Rule 9 CPC along

That no cogent reason whatsoever has been asserted in the

That no injury would be sustained if the suit is not restored.

That justice requires that application U/O 9 Rule 9 CPC may

Whatever stated above is true and correct to the best of

I know the deponent.