Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 1153 of 1981, decided on 25th April,

1982.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 12‑12‑1981 in C. R. 1565/81).

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑

-----O. XXXIX, r. 2(3)‑Wilful disregard of Court's orders‑Petitioner defendant proceeded against for wilfully disregarding order of Court with regard to maintenance of status quo‑Petitioner denying violation of such order‑Trial Court after recording evidence ordering petitioner's detention in civil prison for four months‑Allegation however made that instead of detaining petitioner in civil prison relevant official detained petitioner in jail where he already suffered one month's R. I.‑Penalty imposed by Civil Judge for disobedience of Court's order, held, rather heavy‑Petitioner having already undergone one month's R. I. instead of being detained in civil prison, period of detention already suffered sufficient to meet ends of justice.‑[Injunction].

Shaukat Ali, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.

The facts leading to the present petition are that Malik Muhammad Aslam respondent No. 2, filed a suit against Moharram Ali, petitioner and five others for a declaration that he could not be turned out from the room occupied by him in the respondent's hotel, without due process of law. Alongwith the suit he filed an application for temporary injunction. Ad interim injunction was granted by the trial Court and notice is stated to have been served on the petitioner. Malik Muhammad Aslam, respondent then filed an application under Order XXXIX, rule 2(3) on the ground that the petitioner/defendant had wilfully disregarded the order of the Court, with regard to the maintenance of status quo. The peti tioner, of course, denied having violated the said order. After recording the evidence the learned Civil Judge ordered his detention in a civil prison for a period of four months. It is alleged that instead of detaining the petitioner in the civil prison the relevant official detained him in a jail, where he had already suffered 1 month's R. I.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length and find that the penalty imposed by the learned Civil Judge for disobedience of the court's order is rather heavy. Considering that he has already under gone one month's R. I., instead of his detention in the civil prison, we are of the view that the period of detention already suffered by him is sufficient to meet the ends of justice. The period of detention, therefore, after converting this petition into appeal is reduced to that already undergone by him. Wit this observation the petition stands disposed of.

Petition disposed of.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.