Once a Last and Final Opportunity has been granted with a warning, failure to comply warrants Dismissal of the Suit --- Lahore High Court, Lahore
Islamabad 04-03-2025: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has dismissed in limine a Regular First Appeal [RFA No. 11082 of 2025] filed against the Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS) & others, upholding the trial Court’s decision to dismiss the suit under Order XVII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908.
The Appellate bench, comprising Mr. Justice Masud Abid Naqvi and Mr. Justice Malik Muhammad Awais Khalid, reaffirmed that Courts must strictly enforce procedural laws to prevent unnecessary delays in litigation and discourage frivolous adjournments.
The appellant lady doctor had filed a suit for recovery of damages amounting to Rs. 67 Crore against LUMS and other defendants. The suit was contested by the respondents, leading to the framing of issues on April 28, 2023. The trial Court granted multiple adjournments to the plaintiff to produce evidence, but despite repeated warnings, she failed to do so over a period of 1.5 years.
After multiple adjournments, including a final opportunity granted with a warning on October 28, 2024, the Civil Judge dismissed the suit on November 18, 2024, under Order XVII Rule 3 CPC. The plaintiff initially challenged the decision before the District Judge, Lahore, but withdrew the appeal to approach the Lahore High Court.
Dismissing the appeal, the Lahore High Court observed that litigants must act diligently and comply with procedural obligations. The judgment emphasized that once a last and final opportunity has been granted with a warning, failure to comply warrants dismissal of the suit.
The Court relied on three Supreme Court of Pakistan precedents:
- Moon Enterpriser CNG Station Vs. SNGPL (2020 SCMR 300): Courts must strictly enforce their own orders and not grant adjournments after the final warning.
- Duniya Gul Vs. Niaz Muhammad (PLD 2024 SC 672): Reaffirmed that Order XVII Rule 3 CPC empowers Courts to dismiss cases where a party fails to produce evidence despite sufficient opportunities.
- Lutfullah Virk Vs. Muhammad Aslam Sheikh (PLD 2024 SC 887): Criticized the “adjournment culture” in Pakistan’s judicial system, highlighting that excessive adjournments lead to case backlog and injustice.
The Lahore High Court strongly condemned the routine misuse of adjournments and its impact on the judicial system. The judgment cited alarming statistics regarding case backlog in Pakistan, where over 2.26 million cases remain pending, with 82% of them in district Courts.
Quoting the (PLD 2024 SC 887), the bench remarked:
- “Adjournments have become a plague for the country’s justice system… This practice robs litigants of their right to speedy justice and exacerbates inefficiency in the judiciary.”
The judgment emphasized that Courts must take strict measures to prevent procedural abuse and ensure that litigants and legal representatives adhere to trial schedules.
Final Verdict & Impact
- The Lahore High Court dismissed the appeal in limine, holding that the appellant lady doctor was given ample opportunities but deliberately failed to present evidence.
- The trial Court’s dismissal of the suit under Order XVII Rule 3 CPC was upheld.
- The Court refused to entertain any further adjournments and reaffirmed that strict adherence to procedural law is necessary for an efficient judicial system.
No costs were awarded in the appeal.
Powered by Froala Editor
