Find a Lawyer

DR. ABDUL JABBAR KHATAK versus SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, LARKANA

ections Sections 3 and 13 - Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. VII, R 11 and Section 9 ama - Defamation - Damages - Plaintiffs, Disclaimers - The jurisdictional rial trial court dismissed the plaintiff on the basis of its jurisdiction. Dismissed request for To decide the matter under Section 9, CPC - Justification - Plaintiffs cannot be dismissed even if none of the many claims are prayed - the trial court has previously stayed the pending case. The matter was directed to settle the matter. Decree of section 13 of the Defamation Honor Ordinance 2002 and other matters as well - the constitutional request was dealt with accordingly, [P 447] B&C

P L D 2017 Sindh 438 

Before Salahuddin Panhwar and Syed Saeeduddin Nasir, JJ

Dr. ABDUL JABBAR KHATAK through Attorney and another—Petitioners

versus

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, LARKANA and 3 others—Respondents

Constitutional Petition No.D-79 of 2012, decided on 29th February, 2016.

(a) Defamation Ordinance (LVI of 2002)—

—Ss. 3 & 13—Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VII, R. 11 & S. 9—Defamation—Damages—Plaint, rejection of—Scope— Trial Court dismissed application for rejection of plaint on the ground that it had jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter under S.9, C.P.C.— Validity—Plaint could not be dismissed in piecemeal even if out of several prayers one could not be granted—Trial Court was directed to frame issue with regard to the maintainability of suit pending before it, in view of S.13 of Defamation Ordinance, 2002 and pronounce judgment on the same along with other issues—Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly, [p. 447] B & C

2004 MLD 1081 rel.

(b) Defamation Ordinance (LVI of 2002)—

—S. 13—Defamation—Suit for damages—Jurisdiction of civil court—Scope—Word “shall” contained in S.13 of Defamation Ordinance, 2002—Scope—Jurisdiction of civil court with regard to suit for damages on the ground of loss of reputation and defamation was barred under S.13 of Defamation Ordinance, 2002—District Court had exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate such matters—When special tribunal or court had been established to hear and decide the dispute then jurisdiction of courts constituted under general law should be I ousted from exercising power of the nature—Word “shall” used in Section 13 of Defamation Ordinance, 2002 had mandatory nature of provision with regard to exclusive jurisdiction to try cases of defamation, [p. 446] A

Raees Ghulam Sarwar v. Mansoor Sadiq Zaidi and 4 others PLD 2008 Kar. 458 ref.

Khadim Hussain and 12 others v. Gul Hassan Tiwano and 3 others 2014 MLD 574; Pakistan Herald Publications (Pvt.) Ltd. and 2

others v. Karachi Building Control Authority 2012 CLD 453; Capt.

(Rtd.) Nayyar Islam v. Judge, Accountability Court No.Ill and others 2012 SCMR 669; Lahore Beverage Company (Pvt.) Limited v. Muhammad Javed Shafi and 2 others 2008 CLC 759; Muhammad Abul Olla v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan and another 1989 CLC 1146; Azhar Chaudhry v. Presidents Executive Committee and another 2007 YLR 2231; Khadim Hussain v. Gul Hassan Tiwano 2013 CLD 981; Ghulam Hussain and another v. Malik Shahbaz and another 1985 SCMR 1925; Manzoor Hussain Shah and 15 others v. Allah Bachaya Khan and 5

others 1986 CLC 1813 and Noor Muhammad v. Sarwar Khan and 2

others PLD 1985 SC 131 rel.

(c) Interpretation of statutes—

—Special law would exclude general law. [p. 446] A

(d) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)—

-—O. VII, R.ll—Plaint rejection of—Scope—Plaint cannot be dismissed in piece meal, even if out of several prayers, one could not be granted. [p. 447] B

Imdad Ali Mashori for Petitioner.

Habibullah Ghouri for Respondent No.3.

Date of hearing: 3rd September, 2015.

lawer from fb area from Sherani lawyer