Petitioner has filed this civil revision against the order dated 12.06.2020 passed from the court of Mr. Ibrar Ali Khan, learned Civil Judge Ist Class Depalpur, through which his right to submit written statement and reply of application for a temporary injunction was struck off.
2 Learned counsel for petitioner/defendant submitted that he never received any process of court for his summoning in suit for specific performance with permanent injunction filed by respondent/plaintiff. That in said suit on 07.01.2020 Waqalat Nama of Main Imtiaz ul Haq Advocate was shown to be submitted on his behalf. That said counsel also belonged to the Chamber of learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff. That petitioner/ defendant never appointed any counsel nor submitted any Waqalat Nama in above suit. That all said proceedings on his behalf were fake and result of collusiveness. Therefore impugned order being against facts and law is not sustainable.
3 On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff supported impugned order, contested this civil revision and prayed for its dismissal.
4 Arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties have been heard and record perused.
5 As per record respondent/plaintiff filed suit for specific performance with a permanent injunction against petitioner/defendant on 23.12.2019 in which Main Imtiaz ul Haq Advocate submitted Waqalat Nama on behalf of petitioner/defendant on 07.01.2020. Despite availing ample opportunities even with repeated costs petitioner/defendant failed to submit a written statement and reply of application for a temporary injunction and eventually his right to submit the same was a strike of vide impugned order dated 17.06.2020. To be noted petitioner/defendant did not move any application before the learned trial court for the alleged fake Waqalat Nama submitted on his behalf nor he resorted to any legal remedy available to him against the concerned for alleged forgery. In these circumstances, no illegality or irregularity was committed by the learned trial court while striking of his right to submit a written statement and reply to the application for a temporary injunction through impugned order. This civil revision is accordingly dismissed. Copy of this judgment be sent to learned trial court immediately and file of this civil revision be consigned to record room after its necessary completion within the stipulated period.
Petitioner/plaintiff has filed this civil revision against order dated 29.09.2020 passed from the court of Mr. Aleem Zia, learned Civil Judge Class-II Depalpur, through which respondents/defendants were directed not to disconnect his electricity connection subject to deposit of 1/3rd of disputed bill.
2 Learned counsel for petitioner/plaintiff submitted that being consumer of subject electricity connection he had been paying all dues regularly. That respondents/defendants issued bill for November, 2019 of Rs.444,044/- against 1020 units which was in excess of actual consumption and on his approach the same was rectified as Rs.252,000/- which he accordingly paid. However respondents /defendants continued to charge him illegal dues and lastly demanded the same as Rs.431,261/- mentioned in columns of arrears of bill for August, 2020 which he has challenged through present suit. That he is ready to pay current bill for August 2020. Hence, learned trial court was not justified to direct him to deposit 1/3rd of said disputed bill.
3 On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents/ defendants supported impugned order, contested this civil revision and prayed for its dismissal. He submitted that huge arrears are outstanding against petitioner/plaintiff as revealed from billing history of bill for August 2019 to July 2020. That he did not pay even a single penny for most of bills and paid only partial dues against few monthly bills. .
4 Arguments advanced by learned counsel for parties have been heard and record perused.