IN THE COURT OF MR.

SHAIKH AFZAL AHMAD CIVIL JUDGE

PESHAWAR
Munir Hussain ..Plaini!!
V"S
C#i$! S$%r$ar& K#&'$r Pu(#))n(#*a an+ )#$rs .D$!$n+an
Subject: R$,l& )n -$#al! )! #$ Plaini!! A.ains #$ A,,li%ai)n )! D$!$n+an
n)/ 0
Da$+ 1232134214 !)r S$in. Asi+$ E53Pari$ Ju+.$6$n"D$%r$$ Da$+ 473283
4214
In #$ a')9$ Til$+ Cas$.
Respectfully Sheweth :
It is submitted that the appearance of the defendant in this
honourable court is badly barred of time and according to article 164 limitation act the
defendant came to court beyond ! days after the decree"order passed from this
honourable court inspite of all the legal notices"summons ser#ed by the defendant $the
defendant deliberately ignored and #iolated of all the summons"noties and now came
to the court after the #iolation of the court order in which one month deadline is gi#en
to defendants but all the defendants including defendant no 4 defianced of the order of
this honourable court and when the contemp of court proceedings initiated against
the defendant no 4 $the defendant no 4 now came to court with the application to set
aside the %&'partie decree"order to mislead the honourable court for their ulterior
moti#es.(hich is greatly liable to dissmiss.
PARAWISE COMMENTS /
1: )ara no 1 is not rele#ant to plaintiff.
*: )ara no * is Incorrect and based on a white lie $the defendant no 4 deliberately
neglected "suppressed all the notices"summons $issued by this honourable court time
by time.and didn+t attend the court malafidely inspite of all the summons"notices
ser#ed by the defendant no 4. ,he details of these notices"summons are as under $
a-: .ist order of summon issued from the court of /uhammad Shoaib ci#il judge
)eshawar on 11'!'*!!6 01ttested copy of the order sheet attached as 1nu&:
1- .
b-:*
nd
order of summon issued from the court of ci#il judge 2ina /ehwish Sahiba
on
!3'!'*!!6 and recei#ed by the concerned office cler4 on *4'!'*!!6 .
01ttested copy of order of the summon and its ser#ice attached as 1nu&:5 and
51 respecti#ely-
c-:
rd
order of summon issued from the court of 2ina /ehwish on 1!'6'*!!6.
0attached as 1nu&:5-

d-: 4rh order of Summon of notice of 1ffi&ation was issued by the ci#il judge
2ina
/ehwish in which na7ir is directed.,he summon is ser#ed by the concerned
8ffice cler4 and notice is affi&ed on the office of the defendant on *3'!6'
*!!6.
01ttested copy of the order of the summon and its affi&ation is attahed as
1nu&:9
and 91 respeti#ely-
e-: according to order sheed of the ci#il judge 2ina /ehwish sahiba $defendant
no 4
is ser#ed through notice of affi&ation but didn+t attent the court dated 1'!:'
*!!6.
2ence defendant no 4 is proceeded %&')artie.
0attested copy of ordrshet and summon are attached as 1nu&:; -
f-: 8nce again fresh summons were issued to defendant no 4 and others by ci#il
judge
2ina /ehwish on !4'1*'*!!6 and recei#ed by the concerned office cler4 on
1<'1*'*!!6. attested copy of ordersheet and summon attahed as 1nu& % and
%1- .
g-: 1gain freshorder summon was issued from the court of ci#il judge 2ina
/ehwish
on *4'1*!!: and recie#d by the concerned office cler4 on !1'!*'*!!: .
0 attested copy of order sheet and summons are attached as 1nu&: . and .1
Res:-
h-: 1gain order of summon was issued from the court of ci#il judge Sunbal
=aseer
on !6'!'*!!: and recei#ed by the concerned office cler4 on 14''*!!:.
01ttested copy of order sheet and summon are attached as 1nu&:>?>1 res:-
i-: =otice of publication in daily /ashri@ was ordered by ci#il judge Sunbal
=aseer
in daily mashri@ finally on *6'!6'*!!: .0 attested copy of order sheet attached
as
1nu&: 2-
j-: )ublication daily news paper$daily /ashri@ ;ated 1 September *!!: recei#ed
on 1:'11'*!!: in the court of .ar7ana Shahid .0attested copy of the
)ublication
in daily /ashri@ on 1'!<'*!!: is attahed as 1nu&: I-
4-: %#en after the publication in daily mashri@ still defendant no 4 didn+t
presented
in the court .2ence defendant no 4 is placed and proceeded %&'partie on
1:'11'*!!: .0attested copy of order sheet is attached as 1nu&: A-
(hile the defendants 1?* contested the case after %& )artie
)roceedings initiated agaisnt them.
In the light of the abo#e mentioned resord $the allegation raised by the defendant upon
this honourable couort is false and against Baw.
-: )ara no is incorrect.defendant no 4 was well aware about the case through the
summons"notines$ser#ed by the concerned office cler4 $then the affi&ation notice
was ser#ed and publication in daily mashri@ was ser#ed on 1'!<'*!!: .5ut all the
mentioned notices are ignored deliberately and defendant no 4 didn+t attend the
court . ,he absence of the defendant was malafide and intentional .and then the
appearance
of the defendant no 4 on 1!'!1'*!1* is bady barred of time .5ecause the
prescribed
period of limitation for ma4ing the application for setting aside e&'partie decree"order
is ! days and as the application is made beyond much time$it is Biable to dissmissal.
4-: )ara no 4 is incorrect and baseless.,he decree has not been passed as a result of
any
fraud and misrepresentation.5ut defendant no 1? * who is a >o#enmental 5ody $
contested the case sereously and the case is decided on merit.
6-: )ara no 6 is Incorrest .,he plaintiff lodged the plaint not only agaisnt the )a4istan
%ngineering 9ouncil 0defendant no 1? *- but also agaist agaist >o#t of )a4istan and
>o#t of Chyber )u4htoo4hwa 0defendant no ?4 respecti#ely- (ho ha#e the e@ual
power and authorities of the age rele&ation. 1nd 1s the >o#t of 4hyber )u4htoon
Chwa is the pro#incial >o#t which is Subordinate of the federal >o#t and the order
applies on the federal >o#t would be applied on the pro#incial >o#t .5ecause there is
no state in the state. 1part from this the >o#t of 4hyber pu4htoon4hwa has its own
rules about general age rele&ation which is the other subject and if the order of the
court would not be implimented upon the defendant no 4 the plaintiff would be
depri#ed for all the pro#incial jobs due to o#er aged$ caused due to the mista4es and
neglegance of )a4istan %ngineering council0defendant no 1?*- which is a
>o#ernmentall organi7ation and for the illegal mista4es of )a4istan %ngineering
cousil both the defendants no ?40>o#t of )a4istan Islamabad and >o#t of 4hyber
pu4htoon4hwa are resposible.
6-: )ara 6 is Incorrect and consists of dishonesty .5ecause the plaint is decided on
merit
and a detailed judment is present in which all the concerned e#idents from the
plaintiff
and defendant no 1? * 0 pa4istan %ngg 9ouncil- are produced before this 2onourable
court and cross %&amined well and after a detailed judgement $the plaint is decided in
fa#our of the )laintiffas per prayer.
:-: para no : is Incorrect and false .,he application from the defendant no 4 is badly
time
barred and liable to dismissal .,he application was made by the defendant more than
! days after passing the e&'partie decree"order and according to limitation act article
164 it was necessary for the defendant to ma4e the restoration application within !
days of the %&'partie ;ecree"8rder.5ut in the present case the application of the
defendant is late more than 6 months .which is badly barred of time.
3-: Dehemently denied$ the defendant statement is malafide to achie#e ulterior
moti#es. If
the .ederal >o#t Islamabad is restricted upon the implimentation of the decree"order
of the honourable court $the matter of the interest and loss of the pro#incial >o#t has
no any
mean .,he order of the court is e@ually acceptable for all the defendants
.
<-: )ara no is correct .but unable to persue in this case .and the defendant no 4 tries to
mislead the hourable court to achie#e their ulterior moti#es .5ecause inspite of
the summons "notices ser#ed by the defendant $defendant didn+t not produce before
the court $neglected the notices. .and when the decree"order is passed against
defentant no 4 $defendant came to court with application of setting aside %&')artie
decree"judgement beyond the time of ! days .and now came after 6 months to
mislead and decie#e to this honourable court .
1!-: ;enied : ;efendant no 4 is not Biable to gi#e the permission of any argument
due to
#iolation ";isobedience of the decree "order of this honourable court
So it is humbly re@uested to dismiss the application of the defentant dated 1!'!1'
*!1* for setting aside %&'partie judgement"order dated *':'*!11.5ecause the
defendant was well aware about the case through fre@uent notices"summons from this
homourable court but e#ery notice is neglected deliberately after the ser#ice of the
concerned office cler4 and now after more than 6 months after the decree"order
passed $the appearance and application of the defendant is badly time barred.
5ut when the defendant defianced the decree"order of the honourable court and
contempt of court proceeding are initiated agaist defendant $defendant now came to
court to mislead the court towards other direction to sa#e himself from the legal
actions against him.
Sincerely $
1dnan 2aider 1d#ocate $
8n 5ehalf of )laintiff. $
/unir 2ussasin S"8 (a7ir Chan
;ated: *6 E ! E *!1*