MPORTANT STAGES IN TRIAL OF A CIVIL SUIT!

IMPORTANT STAGES IN TRIAL OF A CIVIL SUIT!
It is for the guidance of young legal eagles who want to excel in discharge of their professional duties while being seisin with trial of any civil suit to note down and follow the procedure stage by stage as under;
1. Plaintiff has to file the plaint complying the provisions in all respect as contemplated under Order iv & Order Vi and Vii of the code.
2. Plaintiff has to issue summons within 30 days from the institution of suit.
3. After the service of summons defendant has to file his written
statement within 30 days from the receipt of summons as per Order Viii R 1 of the code
4. No opportunities more than two as per proviso to Order Viii R 1 of the code will be granted.
5. Within 10 days from the filing of written statement court has to
examine the parties so as to explore the possibilities of
compromise in between the parties and to refer the matter of settlement under section 89 & 89 AA of the code.
6. If parties fail to effect compromise the matter, then court has to keep the matter for discovery and inspection within the time span of 7– 10 – 10 – 3 days, as per Order Xi of the code.
7. Then to adjourn the matter for admission within the time span of
15 days as per Order Xii of the code.
8. Then parties have to file the original documents prior to framing of issues within the time span of 7 days, as per Order Xiii of the
code.
9. Court has to frame the issues within 15 days as per Order Xiv of the code if the parties are at issues.
10. Parties have to file the list of witnesses within 7 days from the date of framing of issues as per Order Xvi of the code.
11. Plaintiff has to issue summons to the witnesses either for
adducing evidence or for production of documents within 14 days of filing of list as per Order Xvi R 1 of the code.
12. Parties have to settle the date of evidence as per Order Xvi of the code.
13. Plaintiff has to file the affidavits of all his witnesses within 3
adjournments as per Order Xviii of the code.
14. Court has to exhibit the documents considering their proof and
admissibility with a reasoned order as per proviso to Order Xviii R 4
(1) of the code.
15. Examination and Cross examination of the plaintiff and his
witnesses on day to day until all the witnesses are examined.
16. Defendant has to issue summons to the witnesses either for
adducing evidence or for production of documents as per Order Xvi R 1 (4) of the code.
17. Defendant has to file the affidavits of all of his witnesses.
18. Court has to exhibit the documents considering their proof and
admissibility with a reasoned order as per proviso to Order Xviii R 4
(1) of the code.
19. Examination and Cross examination of the defendant and his
witnesses on day to day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined.
20. Parties have to conclude their arguments within 15 days from the completion of their respective evidence as per Order Xiii R 2 of
the code.
21. Court has to deliver judgment forthwith or on or before 30 days
from the date of conclusion of the arguments as per Order XX R 1 of the code.
22- judgement shall be pronounced in open court issue wise under Order XX R 5 of the code.

Summery suit

IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE HYDERABAD
Summary Suit No.        of 2009




Shaukat Ali Khan
s/o Faiz Muhammad Kan
by caste Khanzada, adult, Muslim
Resident of House No.1014 Choori
Para Tando Allahyar    ---------------------------  Plaintiff
Versus
Muhammad Eissa alias Amjad Hussain
s/o Allah Bachayo by caste Memon,
Resident of village Haji Maqbool
Ahmed Memon Dah Palijani
Taluka & District Matiari    --------------------   Plaintiff


SUMMARY SUIT U/O 37 RULE-1
         The above named very respectfully begs to submit as under: -

1-         That, the plaintiff is a respectable and law abiding citizen having good business relation with defendant.

2-        That, on 06-02-2009 defendant  lend an amount of Rs.150,000/- (Rupees One Lac Fifty Thousand Only) from plaintiff for his urgent need for one day and issued such cheque No.2544646 dated 07-02-2009 in the name of plaintiff with promise that remittance will come in his account No.0001033460 on 07-02-2009 and said cheque will be encashed. However on next day when plaintiff deposited the said cheque in the concerned bank it become dishonoured and bank issued such memo with reason that “fund not sufficient”. Thereafter plaintiff approached to defendant goodself to return of his money.
( 2 )
3-         That, since plaintiff has time and again approached to the defendant, defendant has started extending threats of dire consequences to plaintiff, in this way not only plaintiff has committed cheating and forgery by issuing bogus and false cheque to plaintiff, so also committed breach of trust and both of said acts come with the ambit of Pakistan Penal Code as well as pertain to the civil nature.

5-        That, the cause of action accrued to the plaintiff to file present suit when defendant has failed to disburse his liabilities despite issuance of instruments/cheques in the name of plaintiff and same cause of action is accruing day by day till today.

6-        That, necessary court fee is paid in shape of stamps.

7-         That, the plaintiff respectfully prays for following judgment and decree against the defendant.

PRAYER
That, this Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the defendant to pay Rs.150,000/- to the plaintiff alongwith profit as per market rate.

Cost of the suit be saddled on the defendant.
Any other relief which this Honourable Court deems fit and proper may please be awarded to the plaintiff.


Hyderabad
Dated:                    ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF

Verification.
         I, Shaukat Ali Khan s/o Faiz Muhammad Kan  by caste Khanzada, adult, Muslim Resident of House No.1014 Choori Para Tando Allahyar at present at Hyderabad do hereby verify on oath that whatever stated above is true and correct to my knowledge and belief.

                                ( deponent )
( 2 )
I know the deponent above named


( Advocate )

        The deponent above named is identified by Mr. Aghis-u-Salam Tahirzada, Advocate who is personally known to me.

                      Commissioner for taking  affidavit.

        The contents of above affidavit have been read over and explained to the deponent above named in his language at Hyderabad on this 8th, day of June 2009 which he confirms by putting his signature as true and correct on solemn affirmation before me.

                     Commissioner for taking  affidavit.



DOCUMENTS FILED


DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON
SAME AS SHOWN IN CAUSE TITLED

ADDRESSES OF THE PARTIES.
SAME AS SHOWN IN CAUST TITLE.

                            ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF




IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE HYDERABAD
Summary Suit No.    of 2009


Muhammad Ayaz s/o Usman
by caste Khanzada, Muslim, adult,
Resident of House No.1446 Ward-B
Khanzada Mohallah Tando Allahyar        -------------------       Plaintiff
Versus
Abdul Hashim Shah    ----------------------------------------    Defendant


SUMMARY SUIT U/O 37 RULE-1
         The plaintiff above named very respectfully begs to submit as under: -
1-         That, the plaintiff runs the business of Electronic with his father-in-law Muhammad Khan s/o Sultan Khan Khanzada with the name and style “Ali Enterprises” at Patoli Para, Opposite MCB Bank Tando Allahyar Branch.
2-         That, the plaintiff intended to install CNG filing station at Nasarpur Road by pass Tando Allahyar, for that reason Muhammad Hussain Khanzada, who is working as property dealer and commission agent brought a person in the office of the plaintiff at Patoli Para, Tando Allahyar and introduced him to be Abdul Hussain, marketing officer, Masters Marketing International Lahore and disclosed that said person will help for getting license, permission, and machinery for installation of CNG station.
3-         That, the plaintiff gave them the documents of his property where CNG station is to be installed. After some time defendant No.1 sent quotation of machinery and some other documents through courier service on the letter head pad of “M/s Masters Marketing International”.
4-         That, the plaintiff filed the said documents and complete required formalities according to those documents and sent the same to the defendant No.1 at their given address at Karachi and on the basis of said documents on different occasion in the name of company and on the pretext of expenditure obtained Rs.45,00,000/- (Rupees Four Million Five Hundred Only) from the plaintiff, detail whereof are as under: -
         Demand draft No.0878872 dated 15-07-2006 Rs.1000,000/-
( 2 )
5-         That, the defendants acknowledged the same and sent such receipts to the plaintiff upon which the signatures in the name Irfan Ghori CEO were appended, the defendants also sent dealer ship deed and letters addressed to the plaintiff.
6-         That, in the meantime Abdul Hussain Shah, Irfan Ghori, Zakir Hussain Shah and Muhammad Hussain Khanzada who surveyed the property and prepare physibility report, but no progress has been made. Plaintiff time and again contacted with the above named defendant, but they kept him on false hopes subsequently defendants replied since the prices of the machinery have been increased in the international market, therefore they are unable to provide him the machinery as per quotation given to plaintiff and also expressed their willingness that they are ready to pay the given amount of plaintiff.
7-        That, in this regard the defendants issued two cheques of Rs.2,000,000/- each detailed below:
     i)    Cheque No.763328 dated 25-11-2008 Rs.2,000,000/- MCB Bank Tando Allahyar A/C No.               of Zakir Hussain Shah.
ii)    Cheuqe No.7411707 dated 01-10-2008 Rs.2,000,000/- MCB Bank Korangi Industrial Area Branch ST-6/5, sector-24 Karachi.

8-         That, the plaintiff deposited the said cheques in his A/c No.3348/4 at MCB Bank Tando Allahyar Branch and the said dishonoured with the reason “Not Arranged For”. The plaintiff also contacted with above named defendants regarding dishonour of the cheques, they kept the plaintiff on false hopes.

9-         That, on 06-01-2009 at about 6:30 p.m the above name defendants alongwith four unknown persons, who would be identified on seeing again, arrived at the office of plaintiff and demanded their issued cheques back and stated that they will get returned the amount of plaintiff directly from the company in the account of plaintiff. Plaintiff asked them that firstly they make payment of his amount then he would return the cheques upon which they become annoyed on the refusal of the cheques threatened or murder. The four unknown persons who were with them and duly armed with pistols, fallen down the articles lying in the office and beaten to the plaintiff with kicks and fists. The plaintiff raised cries which attracted to Imran s/o Aziz Khanzada, Khalil-ur-Rehman s/o Muhammad Hanif Khanzada and other passerby who arrived over there and rescued the plaintiff. Thereafter Abdul Hussain Shah, Muhammad Hussain Khanzada, Irfan Ghori and Zakir Hussain Shah threatened the plaintiff for dire consequences, if the cheques are not returned to them, they will come again and then they went away.
( 3 )
10-         That, the plaintiff lodged such FIR vide crime No.23 of 2009 of P.S Tando Alahyar U/s 406, 420, 506(2), 427, 489-F, 147, 148, 149 PPC by the orders of Honourable Sessions Judge Hyderabad on the application U/s 22-A & B Cr.P.C.
11-         That, the defendants are white collar criminals, cheater, gangster and extractors having political influence and influence over local administration and they ruined the life of the plaintiff and taken away all savings of the plaintiff by illegal means.
12-         That, the cause of action accrued to the plaintiff to file present suit when defendants has failed to disburse his liabilities dispite issuance of instruments/cheques in the name of plaintiff an dsame cause of action is accruing day of day till today.
         That, necessary court fee is paid in shape of stamps.
         That, the Honourable Court has got jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter.
         That, the plaintiff respectfully prays for following judgment and decree against the defendants.

P R A Y E R
a)    That, this Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the defendants to pay Rs.4,000,000/- to the plaintiff alongwith profit as per market rate.
b)    That, this Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the defendants to pay Rs.500,000/- to the plaintiff alongwith at market rate taken by defendants.
c)    Cost of the suit be saddled on the defendants.
d)    Any other relief which this Honourable Court deems fit and proper may please be awarded to the plaintiff.

Hyderabad
Dated:                            PLAINTIFF



IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE HYDERABAD
Summary Suit No.    of 2009


Muhammad Ayaz s/o Usman
by caste Khanzada, Muslim, adult,
Resident of House No.1446 Ward-B
Khanzada Mohallah Tando Allahyar        -------------------       Plaintiff
Versus
Zakir Hussain Shah Shah    ----------------------------------    Defendant


SUMMARY SUIT U/O 37 RULE-1
         The plaintiff above named very respectfully begs to submit as under: -
1-         That, the plaintiff runs the business of Electronic with his father-in-law Muhammad Khan s/o Sultan Khan Khanzada with the name and style “Ali Enterprises” at Patoli Para, Opposite MCB Bank Tando Allahyar Branch.
2-         That, the plaintiff intended to install CNG filing station at Nasarpur Road by pass Tando Allahyar, for that reason Muhammad Hussain Khanzada, who is working as property dealer and commission agent brought a person in the office of the plaintiff at Patoli Para, Tando Allahyar and introduced him to be Abdul Hussain, marketing officer, Masters Marketing International Lahore and disclosed that said person will help for getting license, permission, and machinery for installation of CNG station.
3-         That, the plaintiff gave them the documents of his property where CNG station is to be installed. After some time defendant No.1 sent quotation of machinery and some other documents through courier service on the letter head pad of “M/s Masters Marketing International”.
4-         That, the plaintiff filed the said documents and complete required formalities according to those documents and sent the same to the defendant No.1 at their given address at Karachi and on the basis of said documents on different occasion in the name of company and on the pretext of expenditure obtained Rs.45,00,000/- (Rupees Four Million Five Hundred Only) from the plaintiff, detail whereof are as under: -
         Demand draft No.0878872 dated 15-07-2006 Rs.1000,000/-
( 2 )
5-         That, the defendants acknowledged the same and sent such receipts to the plaintiff upon which the signatures in the name Irfan Ghori CEO were appended, the defendants also sent dealer ship deed and letters addressed to the plaintiff.
6-         That, in the meantime Abdul Hussain Shah, Irfan Ghori, Zakir Hussain Shah and Muhammad Hussain Khanzada who surveyed the property and prepare physibility report, but no progress has been made. Plaintiff time and again contacted with the above named defendant, but they kept him on false hopes subsequently defendants replied since the prices of the machinery have been increased in the international market, therefore they are unable to provide him the machinery as per quotation given to plaintiff and also expressed their willingness that they are ready to pay the given amount of plaintiff.
7-        That, in this regard the defendants issued two cheques of Rs.2,000,000/- each detailed below:
     i)    Cheque No.763328 dated 25-11-2008 Rs.2,000,000/- MCB Bank Tando Allahyar A/C No.               of Zakir Hussain Shah.
ii)    Cheuqe No.7411707 dated 01-10-2008 Rs.2,000,000/- MCB Bank Korangi Industrial Area Branch ST-6/5, sector-24 Karachi.

8-         That, the plaintiff deposited the said cheques in his A/c No.3348/4 at MCB Bank Tando Allahyar Branch and the said dishonoured with the reason “Not Arranged For”. The plaintiff also contacted with above named defendants regarding dishonour of the cheques, they kept the plaintiff on false hopes.

9-         That, on 06-01-2009 at about 6:30 p.m the above name defendants alongwith four unknown persons, who would be identified on seeing again, arrived at the office of plaintiff and demanded their issued cheques back and stated that they will get returned the amount of plaintiff directly from the company in the account of plaintiff. Plaintiff asked them that firstly they make payment of his amount then he would return the cheques upon which they become annoyed on the refusal of the cheques threatened or murder. The four unknown persons who were with them and duly armed with pistols, fallen down the articles lying in the office and beaten to the plaintiff with kicks and fists. The plaintiff raised cries which attracted to Imran s/o Aziz Khanzada, Khalil-ur-Rehman s/o Muhammad Hanif Khanzada and other passerby who arrived over there and rescued the plaintiff. Thereafter Abdul Hussain Shah, Muhammad Hussain Khanzada, Irfan Ghori and Zakir Hussain Shah threatened the plaintiff for dire consequences, if the cheques are not returned to them, they will come again and then they went away.
( 3 )
10-         That, the plaintiff lodged such FIR vide crime No.23 of 2009 of P.S Tando Alahyar U/s 406, 420, 506(2), 427, 489-F, 147, 148, 149 PPC by the orders of Honourable Sessions Judge Hyderabad on the application U/s 22-A & B Cr.P.C.
11-         That, the defendants are white collar criminals, cheater, gangster and extractors having political influence and influence over local administration and they ruined the life of the plaintiff and taken away all savings of the plaintiff by illegal means.
12-         That, the cause of action accrued to the plaintiff to file present suit when defendants has failed to disburse his liabilities dispite issuance of instruments/cheques in the name of plaintiff an dsame cause of action is accruing day of day till today.
13-         That, necessary court fee is paid in shape of stamps.
14-         That, the Honourable Court has got jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter.
15-         That, the plaintiff respectfully prays for following judgment and decree against the defendants.

P R A Y E R
16-        That, the plaintiff respectfully prays as under:-
A)    That, this Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the defendants to pay Rs.500,000/- to the plaintiff alongwith at market rate taken by defendants.
c)    Cost of the suit be saddled on the defendants.
d)    Any other relief which this Honourable Court deems fit and proper may please be awarded to the plaintiff.

Hyderabad
Dated:                            PLAINTIFF

written statment

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL/FAMILY JUDGE & JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-VII HYDERABAD
Family Suit No. 18 of 2007


MST. AISHA        -----------------------             Plaintiff

Versus

MUHAMMAD SUHAIL    ------------------              Defendant



WRITTEN STATEMENT.
        The plaintiff above named very respectfully begs to submit his written statement as under:-
        That, contents of Para-1 of the suit are admitted.
        That, contents of Para-2 of the suit are denied. It is submitted dower amount has been paid by the defendant on first night of marriage on demand by the plaintiff.
        That, contents of Para-3 of the suit are  denied being false and concocted. It is submitted that plaintiff was given very nominal dowry articles worth Rs.50,000/- and at the time of leaving the house of defendant, the plaintiff has taken away all the gold ornaments and valuable clothes including gold ornaments and valuable clothes given by the side of defendant worth Rs.30,000/-. It is also denied that Television, Deep-Freezer and Washing Machine were given to the plaintiff in dowry, but only bad room set was given to her which is lying in the house of defendant.
        That, contents of Para-4 of the suit are denied in toto. It is submitted defendant has an adequate source of income and he properly maintained the plaintiff in all respects within his means, but it is the plaintiff who proved herself a disobedient, unfaithful and unwilling wife as she used to leave the house of defendant in his absent without prior permission always stayed in the house of her parents several days and being a loving husband defendant bear her such attitude.
        That, contents of Para-5 of the suit are false, fabricated, concocted and baseless hence denied vehemently. On the contrary it is the defendant who tolerate the attitude of the plaintiff being loving husband but plaintiff did not care.
        That, contents of Para-6 of the suit are denied vehemently being false and concocted. It is submitted that plaintiff was a disobedient and unwilling wife and on several occasions he left the house of defendant without his prior permission and used to stay in the house of her parents for couple of days but on 26-2-2007 she left the house of defendant in his absent without his prior permission and taken away all the gold ornaments and valuable clothes including the gold ornaments and clothes given by the side of defendant and since then she is residing in the house of her parents. The defendant number of times approached himself and through the elders of the family to resolve the matter amicably and to bring the plaintiff to his home, but due to the ill behaviour of the plaintiff and her disinterest the matter has not been resolved.
        That, contents of Para-7 of the suit are false, fabricated and concocted as such denied vehemently.  It is further submitted that plaintiff is residing in the house of her parents without any cause and reason and without prior permission of the defendant, despite several approaches made by the defendant and his elders she did not turn up to the house of defendant. However during her stay with the defendant she was properly maintained by the defendant in all respects.
        That, contents of Para-8 of the suit are groundless and baseless hence denied vehemently. It is further submitted that in this para plaintiff has not defined clearly that what kind of cruelty and maltreatment has been committed by the defendant and this para does not prove any cruelty, misbehave, maltreatment and non-maintenance,

   

Settllment of account

IN THE COURT OF IIIRD SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HYDERABAD.

F.C Suit No.         of 2007.


Thanwar Das s/o Mangal Mal
adult, Hindu, Proprietor of Dastagir
Daal Mill SITE Area plot No.E-12
Hyderabad.         -------------------        Plaintiff.

V E R S U S.

Thaku Mal s/o Kodu Mal
adult, Hindu, Resident of Hyderabad
Dal Mill near near Custom House,
SITE Area, Hyderabad.
Muhammad Rafique Broker s/o not known
adult, muslim, by caste Memon
Resident of near Telephone Exchange
Market, Bell Khana Road, Hyderabad.
Altaf Hussain s/o not known
Adult, muslim, by caste Memon
Resident of Dua Cloth Shop Resham
Bazar, Hyderabad.
Heman Mal s/o Pau Mal,
adult, Hindu, R/o Amer Cotton Mills
Mirprkhas Road, Tando Allahyar.
Rafique Baba s/o not known
adult, muslim by caste Memon,
Resident of Memon Society near
Wehdat Colony Hyderabad
Shahid s/o not known
adult muslim, by caste Memon,
Proprietor of Halai Traders
National High Way, Morro.
Pawan Kumar s/o not known,
Parnter of Murli Lal R/o Sewani Traders
Kundh Kot.
-- 2 --

Haresh Kumar s/o Jetho Mal
Adult, Hindu, R/o Shah Noorani Brokers
Anaj Mandi market Tower Hyderabad.
Muhammad Yaseen s/o not known
Adutl, Muslim, R/o Muhammad Shafique
Broker near Sakhi Pir Road, Hyderabad.
Saleem Raheel Shaikh s/o not known
Adult, muslim, R/o Doctor Line Saddar
Bazar Hyderabad.
Shahid Karim s/o Abdul Kareem Shaikh
Adult, muslim, by caste Shaikh R/o
Citizen Colony, Hyderabad.
Kirshan Chand s/o Pesoo Mal
adult, Hindu, R/o Proprietor of
Mehran Commission Shahpur new
Galla Mandi, Shahdadpur.
Ramesh Kumar & Chander Kumar 
sons of Pesu Mal, adult, Hindu,
R/o Proprietor of Al-Karam Cotton Factory
Sanghar Road, Shahdadpur
Narander Kumar s/o Shevak Ram
adult, Hindu, R/o Gulistan-e-Sajjad
near Citizen Colony, Hyderabad
    15-   Khalid Chandio s/o Dhani Bux Chandio
adult, muslim, resident of Chandio
Goth near Happy Homes, Citizen Colony,
Hyderabad.
    16-   Muhammad Soomar Khoso s/o not known
           adult, muslim, by caste Khoso resident of
    village Looni Kot District Jamshoro.
    17-   Haji Ibrahim s/o not known
adult, muslim, by caste Pathan,
R/o Jahania Corporation Anaj Mandi
Market Hyderabad.
18-       Sardar Ghulam Mustafa s/o
   
    19-   Naval Mal s/o Bheru Mal
Adult, Hindu, Resident of Thar
Bazar Umerkot.     --------------------         Defendants.


SUIT FOR DECLARATION, SETTLEMENT
OF ACCOUNTS & PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
         The plaintiff is respectfully and graciously submits
as under: -
That, plaintiff is proprietor of Dastagir Daal Mill situated at plot No.12 SITE Area Hyderabad, carrying business of manufacturing sale and purchase of Scab, Pulse and Grain since 2001 having


-- 3 --
been endowed with certain fundamental rights as envisaged under the constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973. Plaintiff was running his business honestly, smoothly without any complaint from any corner. Copy of the lease agreements are filed & marked as anexure-A & A/1.
That, during the business plaintiff contacted with defendants for supplying raw material viz. Scab, Pulse and grain for grind and supplying to buyers of open market, which spread thoughout Sindh and outside Sindh.
That, the plaintiff issued cheques in advance to different suppliers/sellers with regard to the material. The actual claim of defendants are mostly paid in cash but cheques issued as security on the demand of the sellers of raw material for more amount. Thus, defendants No.1 to 9 obtained cheques under coercion & compulsion the number of the cheques and amount are mentioned in the applications submitted to Manager Muslim Commercial Bank Market Tower Branch, Hyderabad, Manager, PICIC Commercial Bank Market Road Branch, Hyderabad and Manager Bank Al-Falah Saddar Branch, Hyderabad. However, copies of the applications are attached herewith & marked as annexure-B,B/1,B/2 & B/3.
That, defendant No.1,6,7,8,9,17 & 18 supplied sub-standard pulse material, after ascertainment of the low standard and quality of raw material, plaintiff refused to receive delivery and returned to sellers. Plaintiff made complaint about low standard material on which defendant No. 1,6,7,8,9,17 & 18 given undertaking that, they will supply pulse of required standard but defendants above not honoured their commitment. Dispute passage of considerable time neither material supplied to plaintiff nor cheques were returned. The detail of the cheques are mentioned in separate application metnioned above.
That, due to critical situation plaintiff sustained loss of millions as there were heavy rain in the year 2005 and 2006 due to unavoidable circumstances, which was unexpected, the entire business of the plaintiff is collapsed and the capital spread in open market was drowned. The plaintiff being respectable and responsible businessman paid outstanding of the defendants from close sources and maintained the ledger.
-- 4 --
That, it is worth mentioned here that, plaintiff supplied products of pulse to defendant No.9 to 17, who are broker/whole seller. the cost of the products supplied to defendants were counted in millions but neither defendants paid the consideration of material nor return the products. During the period of 2006 & 2007 plaintiff returned certain amount to defendants and maintained ledger.
That, it is worth mention here that, defendant No.1 to 9 obtained cheques from plaintiff and put the figure with their own wish and accord, while correct figure of the consideration of material and cash are totally different. Plaintiff maintained ledger/register keeping the entries of credit and debit. The intention of the plaintiff is not to usurp single rupee of any defendant but he honestly wants to settle the accounts with the defendants for this purpose plaintiff requested to defendants for settlement of accounts but they refused to do so. Detailed figure of the accounts are as under: -


S.
No    Name    Cheques under coersion and compulsion     Actual amount.    Plaintiff paid    Balance/ Credit      
01.    Thaku Mal Hyderabad Dal Mill    Rs.  3,77,000/    Rs.   90,000/-    Rs.  45,000/-
    Balance
Rs.  45,000/-      
02.    Muhammad Rafique    Rs.  4,14,500/-    Rs. 2,20,000    Rs.1,90,000/-
    Balance
Rs.  30,000/-      
03.    Altaf Hussain     Rs. 7,35,500/-     Rs. 3,50,000/-    Rs.2,50,000/-
    Balance
Rs.1,50,000/-      
04.    Heman Mal    Rs.40,45,500/-    Rs.10,50,000/-    Rs.8,50,000/-
    Balance
Rs.2,00,000/-      
05.    Rafique Baba     Rs.  2,50,000/-    Rs.  2,50,000/-    Rs.1,75,000/-
    Balance
Rs.  75,000/-      
06.    Halani.    Rs. 8,32,000/-    Rs.  3,50,000/-    Rs.2,80,000/-
    Balance.
Rs.  70,000/-      
07.    Sewani     Rs. 4,00,000/-    Rs. 2,50,000/-    Rs.2,20,000/-     Balance
Rs.  30,000/-      
08.    Haji Ibrahim     Rs.10,93,878/-    Rs. 4,93,000/-    Rs.2,80,000/-    Balance
Rs.2,13,000/-      
09.    Noorani     Rs.5,88,120/-    Rs. 2,10,000/-    Rs.2,10,000/-     Nil   

7-    That, it is honestly submitted that, plaintiff do not want to usurp single rupees of any person/defendant, similarly he will not forgo amount which are outstanding against different defendants. Second chart of the defendants are those who have no instrument, yet

-- 5 --
plaintiff wants to settle the accounts with them. Detailed chart is mentioned as under: -


Sr.
No.    Name    Actual amount    Plaintiff paid    Balance      
01.    Muhammad Yaseen    Rs. 4,00,000/-.    Rs. 2,55,000/-     Rs.1,45,000/-      
02.    Saleem Raheel Shaikh    Rs. 3,70,000/-     Rs. 4,10,000/-     Credit.
Rs.   40,000/-       
03.    Shahid Khan     Rs. 4,50,000/-    Rs. 6,00,000/-    Credit.
Rs.1,50,000/-      
04.    Kishan Chand Pesoo Mal    Rs. 3,90,000/-     Rs. 2,10,000/-     Balance
Rs.1,80,000/-      
05.    Remesh Kumar & Chander Kumar    Rs. 3,80,000/-    Rs. 2,88,000/-    Balance
Rs.  92,000/-      
06.    Narander Kumar     Rs. 6,50,000/-    Rs. 4,50,000/-    Balance
Rs.2,00,000/-      
07.    Khalid Chandio    Rs. 6,00,000/-    Rs. 3,50,000/-    Balance
Rs.2,50,000/-      
08.    Noval Mal     Rs. 2,50,000/-    Rs. 3,60,000/-     Credit
Rs.1,10,000/-      
09.    Sardar Ghulam Mustafa     Rs. 7,90,000/-    Nil    Balance.
Rs.7,90,000/-      
10.    Muhammad Soomar Khoso    Rs. 3,50,000/-    Rs. 3,75,000/-    Credit
Rs.   25,000/-   

8-    That, the plaintiff was maintaining the ledger as per chart, copies of the ledger of each defendant is filed & marked as annexure-C,C/1 to C/18. Each and every amount received by plaintiff and returned to each defendant are mentioned clearly. According to which the plaintiff is also claiming certain amount from the defendants.
9-    That, plaintiff requested to defendants for settlement of accounts according to the ledger but they refused and demanded very high amount with interest and issued threast of dire consequences. Plaintiff is not in a position to return the entire amount to the defendant at once as he sustained loss of millions due to uncertain circumstances and heavy rain of 2005 & 2006. The business of the plaintiff was collapsed and the entire Hyderabad rather Province of Sindh sustained heavy loss during the year 2005 & 2006.
10-    That, it is relevant to submit here that, nowadays the rate of the raw material of escape pulse, and grain are very low but the plaintiff bought the raw material with high rates due to which he also sustained uncertain loss of lacs.
-- 6 --
11-    That, defendants against whom plaintiff demanded certain amount mentioned in the column are not responding and paying the amount while the defendants who are demanding much amount or issuing threats of dire consequences and made the life of the plaintiff miserable. Some defendants are continuously rescueing to plaintiff and advanced threast of killing lodgment of false FIRs and said that, if plaintiff will not return the amuont at their choice they (defendants) will teach lesson.
12-    That, it is necessary to submit here that, the amount of defendant No.1,2,5,7 & others are meagre as mentioned in the column but they have in possession of cheques of high amount which were issued under force and compulstion being security.
13-    That, the plaintiff honestly ready to return the amount of defendants though entire capital was drowned due to rain and other circumstances but the defendants are using coercive methods for recovery of amounts. The acts and the action of the defendants are unlawful, void, abinitio and lialbe to be restrained.
14-    That, defendants have no right or authority to demand illegal amount and this Honourable court is quite competent to settle the accounts after proper adjudication.
15-    That, plaintiff finding no way in the decimal circumstances has invoke the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court for kind redressal and rescue the legitimate right of plaintiff.
16-    That, cause of action accrued to plaintiff in the month of March, 2006 when he received amount from defendant No.1,2 in the month of April, May, June, July, 2006 when plaintiff received amount from defendants, secondly in the month of August, 2006 uptil now when the plaintiff paid amount to defendants as per ledger annexure-C to C/18. Cause of action accrued to plaintiff for invoking the jurisdiction of this Honourable court in the month of July, 2007, when the plaintiff made application to Manager for stoppage of accounts and cause of action accrued when defendants issued threats of dire consequcnes and the same is accruing day by day till filing this suit before this Honourable Court.
-- 7 --
17-    That, plaintiff is residing and carrying business within police station SITE Hyderabad and this Honourble court has got ample power to adjudicate the matter.
18-    That, for the purpose of court fees suit is valued at Rs.400/- for declaration, Rs.400/- for injunction and Rs.80,93,000/- total value of the suit is Rs.80,93,800/- and maximum court fees of Rs.15,000/- is paid.
19-    That, plaintiff therefore, pray as under: -

P R A Y E R.
a)    This Honourable court may be pleased to declare that, action of the defendants for demanding the amount from plaintiff are illegal, void, abinitio.
b)    The defendants may be directed to settle the accounts with plaintiff as per column and ledger and hold that, plaintiff is liable to pay Rs.45,000/- to defendant No.1, Rs.30,000/- to defendant No.2, Rs.1,50,000/- to defendant No.3, Rs.2,00,000/- to defendant No.4, Rs.75,000/- to defendant No.5 Rs.70,000/- to defendant No.6, Rs.30,000/- to defendant No.7, nothing is to be paid to defendant No.8, Rs.1,45,000/- to defendant No.9, there is outstanding of Rs.40,000/- against defendant No.10, outstanding against defendant No.11 of Rs.1,50,000/- while plaintiff is liable to pay Rs.1,80,000/- to defendant No.12, Rs.92,000/- to defendant No.13, Rs.2,00,000/- to defendant No.14, Rs.2,50,000/- to defendant No.15, there are outstanding against defendant No.16 of Rs.25,000/- while plaintiff is liable to pay Rs.2,13,000/- to defendant No.17, Rs.7,90,000/- to defendant No.18, while there are oustanding against defendant No.19 of Rs.1,10,000/-.
c)    This Honourable Court may be pleased to restrain the defendants not to adopt the illegal, unlawful and coerecive methods for the recovery of amount except due course of law.
-- 8 --
d)    Cost of the suit may be saddled.
e)    Any other relief, which this Honourable Court deem fit and proper may be granted in favour of plaintiff.


                             P L A I N T I F F.

V E R I F I C A T I O N.
         I, Thanwar Das s/o Mangal Mal Proprietor of Dastagir Daal Mill SITE Area plot No.E-12 Hyderabad, do hereby state on oath that whatever stated above is all true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Hyderabad.                         D E P O N E N T.
Dated:
I know the deponent.


Advocate.

Documents filed                         Annexures
PSC of rent agreement of 2003 ---------------------- A
PSC of lease agreement of 2006 -------------------- A/1
PSC of Applications to Manager Banks -------------- B to B/3.
PSC of ledger/register -------------------------------- C to C/18


Documents relied upon
1.    All above relevant documents
2.    Any other relevant document found
     necessary would be produced.

Addresses of the parties
Same as shown in cause title
       
               
                         Drafted in our office under
                         instructions of  plaintiff.



SYED JAWAID I.BUKHARI
ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF.






To,
         The District Policer Officer,
         (Operation) Hyderabad.              P.S Market & Cantt.

Subject:     APPLICATION FOR PROTECTION, LEGAL SHELTER AGAINST  ILLEGAL THREATS & DEMAND OF ALTAF HUSSAIN, MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE, RAFIQUE BABA, PAWAN KUMAR PARTNER OF MURLI LAL & OTHERS RESIDENT OF MARKET TOWNER, HYDERABAD.

Respected Sir,
         I am respectable citizen and proprietor of Dastagir Dal Mill SITE Area Hyderabad, dealing with the business of Pulse. I supplied and received raw material of pulse from above accused who obtained number of cheques under coercion and compulsion. The demand of the accused about consideration are much or less paid but the accused are issuing threats of dire consequences by saing that they will lodged report against me and create humiliation harassment. Finding no way I made written application to Manager Muslim Commercial Market Tower Branch, Hyderabad & Manager Bank Al-Falah Saddar Branch Hyderabad so also Manager PICIC Commercial Market Road, Hyderabad and stopped the payment of my account numbers, copies of the application and stoppage of account numbers are filed herewith. The accused came to know about the stoppage of account and cheques become harsh and issued threats at 0530 on 26-07-2007 and said he will teach me lesson through some politicians and get lodged FIR against me. 
         It is therefore, prayed that, my respect, liberty, honour may be procured and legal shelter from accused may be given. I shall remain grateful.


THANWAR DAS s/o Mangal Mal
Proprietor of Dastagir Daal Mill
SITE Area plot No.E-12 Hyderabad.






IN THE COURT OF IIIRD SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HYDERABAD.

F.C Suit No.         of 2007.


Thanwar Das        ----------------------------        Plaintiff.

V E R S U S.

Thaku Mal & others      -----------------------------        Defendants.

APPLICATION U/O XXXIX RULE-1 & 2
R/W SECTION 151 CPC.
        It is prayed on behalf of the plaintiff above named that, this Honourable court may be pleased to grant permanent injunction by restraining the defendants not to create harassment, humiliation and demand illegal, unlawful claim of amounts without settlement. Further be pleased to direct them not to adopt illegal, unlawful methods for recovery of amount except due course of law through themselves, their attorneys, agents, successor, servants, police agencies or in any manner till decision of the suit. On consideration of the accompanying affidavit of plaintiff.

         Prayer is made in the interest of justice.


Hyderabad
Dated:                 ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF



IN THE COURT OF IIIRD SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HYDERABAD.
F.C Suit No.         of 2007.


Thanwar Das        ----------------------------    Plaintiff.

V E R S U S.

Thaku Mal & others      -----------------------------    Defendants.

AFFIDAVIT.
        I, Thanwar Das s/o Mangal Mal Proprietor of Dastagir Daal Mill SITE Area plot No.E-12 Hyderabad, do hereby state on solemn affirmation as under: -
1.    That, I am plaintiff in the above matter as such am well conversant with the facts and say that, accompanying application U/O XXXIX R-1 & 2 R/W Section 151 CPC is drafted and filed under my instructions and contents whereof are true.
2.    That, I got strong prima facie case against the defendants and balance of convenience lies in my favour, if the application is not allowed I will suffer irreparable loss and injury, which can not be compensated in any manner.
3.    That, for the sake of brevity contents of accompanying application may pleased be treated as part and parcel of this affidavit.
Whatever stated above in para No.1 to 3 are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Hyderabad.                    D E P O N E N T.
Dated:
I know the deponent.

Advocate.
        The   deponent above named is   identified by   Mr. Syed Jawaid I. Bukhari, Advocate before Commissioner for taking affidavit, who is personally known to me.

                          COMMISSIONER FOR TAKING AFFIDAVIT

        The contents of above affidavit have been read over and explained to the deponent above named in his language at Hyderabad on this ____ day of July, 2007 which he confirm by putting his signature as true and correct on solemn affirmation before me.

                    COMMISSIONER FOR TAKING AFFIDAVIT









IN THE COURT OF IIIRD SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HYDERABAD.

F.C Suit No.         of 2007.


Thanwar Das        ----------------------------        Plaintiff.

V E R S U S.

Thaku Mal & others      -----------------------------        Defendants.


LIST OF LIST OF WITNESSES.

1-   



2-



3-



    
Hyderabad.
Dated:                 ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF.




IN THE COURT OF IIIRD SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HYDERABAD.

F.C Suit No.         of 2007.


Thanwar Das        ----------------------------        Plaintiff.

V E R S U S.

Thaku Mal & others      -----------------------------        Defendants.


LIST OF LIST OF LEGAL
HEIRS OF PLAINTIFF

1-   



2-



3-



         In case of death of plaintiff legal heir No.     will inform to this Honoruable Court.

    
Hyderabad.
Dated:                 ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF.








IN THE COURT OF IIIRD SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
H Y D E R A B A D.

F.C Suit No.         of 2007.


Thanwar Das        ---------------------------       Plaintiff.

V E R S U S.

Thaku Mal & others.    --------------------            Defendants.


SUIT FOR DECLARATION, SETTLEMENT
OF ACCOUNTS & PERMANENT INJUNCTION.



Hyderabad.
Dated:                     ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF.

News paer service

IN THE COURT OF FAMILY JUDGE HYDERABAD
Family Suit NO. 23 of  2007


HASSAN MEHMOOD  ------------------------------------   Plaintiff
Versus
Gulnaz Ayoub      --------------------------------------    Defendant



         APPLICATION U/O 5 RULE 20 C.P.C.
        It is respectfully prayed on behalf of plaintiff that this Honourable Court may be pleased to pass necessary orders for substitute service/publication in Urdu-newspaper for service upon the defendant, on consideration of the grounds set out in accompanying affidavit.

        Prayer is made in the interest of justice.

Hyderabad
Dated: 30-4-2007        ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF
IN THE COURT OF FAMILY JUDGE HYDERABAD
Family Suit NO. 23 of  2007


HASSAN MEHMOOD  ------------------------------------   Plaintiff
Versus
Gulnaz Ayoub      --------------------------------------    Defendant

AFFIDAVIT.
        I, Hassan Mehmood s/o                        ¸ muslim, adult, Resident of                                  Hyderabad, do hereby state on oath as under:-
1-        That, I am plaintiff in the above matter, as such am well conversant with the facts of the matter.
2-        That, present affidavit and accompanying application for substitute service have been drafted and filed under my instructions and contents of the same are true and correct.
3-        That, all the ordinary modes of service have been applied, but defendant is malafidely avoiding from the service of the summons of the court.
4-        That, defendant malafidely wants to prolong the matter in order to create trouble for me.
5-        That, it is settled principle of law that family matters are to be decided/concluded in speedy manner.
6-        That, if the substitute service/publication is not allowed, then matter will be unnecessarily prolonged and will cause wastage of precious time of this Honourable Court.
7-        That, publication in the newspaper would be helpful for definite service upon the defendant there will remain no chance of non-service upon the defendant, so also purpose of natural justice will be served
8-        That, in case my accompanying application is not allowed, I will suffer irreparable loss and injury.
9-        That, contents of accompanying application may please be treated as part and parcel of this affidavit for the sake of brevity.
10-        Whatever stated above are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
                                                                                                                                                             Hyderabad   
Dated: 25-3-2008                            ( DEPONENT )
( 2 )
I know the deponent above named

( Advocate )
    The deponent above named is identified by
, Advocate, who is personally known to me.

                    Commissioner for taking affidavit
    The contents of above affidavit have been read over and explained to deponent above named in his language at Hyderabad on this 25th day of March 2008 which he confirms by putting his signature as true and correct on solemn affirmation before me.

                     Commissioner for taking affidavit

Rent applicaton execution

IN THE COURT OF III-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
HYDERABAD
Rent Application No.661 of 2004.
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.                OF 2005.

Aijaz Shaikh s/o Abdul Ghafoor
by caste Shaikh, Adult, Muslim
Resident of Bungalow No.169
Block-E Unit No.6 Latifabad
Hyderabad  ------------------------------------------------------------------ APPLICANT



VERSUS

Waseem Maqsood Ahmed
s/o Maqsood Ahmed by caste
yousuf Zai Resident of Bungalow
No. 168-A Block-B Unit No.6
Latifabad Hyderabad  ------------------------------------------------ OPPONENT

1-     RENT APPLICATION NO.
2-     NAME OF THE PARTIES
         APPLICANT:        Aijaz Shaikh s/o Abdul Ghafoor
by caste Shaikh, Adult, Muslim
Resident of Bungalow No.169
Block-E Unit No.6 Latifabad
Hyderabad 

         OPPONENT:         Waseem Maqsood Ahmed
s/o Maqsood Ahmed by caste
yousuf Zai Resident of Bungalow
No. 168-A Block-B Unit No.6   
Latifabad Hyderabad 

3-     DATE OF ORDER:         26-11-2004

4-     WHETHER APPEAL         NIL
    PREFERRED AGAINST
    THE DECREE OR NOT ?

5-    WHETHER ANY             NIL
SATISFACTION
    HAS BEEN MADE TO THE
    DECREE IF YES HOW ?

6-    IS THE DECREE ON         NIL
    TRANSFER ?

7-     HAS ANY EXECUTION         NIL
    APPLICATION BEEN MADE
     AFTER DECREE, IF YES
     WITH WHAT RESULT ?

8-     AMOUNT AWARDED AS:    NIL
        PER DECREE

9-    EXPENDITURE IF ANY        NIL


10-     AGAINST WHOM
     EXECUTION OF APPLICATION
     IS APPLIED FOR ?

11-     MODE IN WHICH THE
     ASSISTANCE OF THE
     COURT IS PRAYED ?


SUMMARY

         The applicant/landlord has filed Rent Application No.61/2004 before this Honourable Court against opponent and after contesting matter this Honourable Court was pleased to pass ejectment order on 26-11-2004. The opponent after ejectment order has not filed any appeal or has not challenge the said order before any court in Pakistan.
         This Honourable Court was please to give 60 days to the opponent for his eviction from the demised premises/shop and directed to hand over the vacant/constructive possession of the shop to applicant/landlord within sixty days. Such period for limitation under the law is only thirty (30) days and opponent has failed to file any appeal before the appellate forum hence applicant/landlord has prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to provide legal aid/protection to obtain physical possession of the said shop.
         The applicant/landlord is ready to pay all legal charges.
         The boundaries of the demises premises/shop No.B/29-18888/1 Chotki Ghitti Hyderabad as under: -
By West        :
By East        :
By South        :
By North        :

Hyderabad Sindh
Dat4ed:                                 APPLICANT

VERIFICATION
         I,  Waseem Maqsood Ahmed s/o Maqsood Ahmed by caste yousuf Zai Resident of Bungalow No. 168-A Block-B Unit No.6 Latifabad Hyderabad , attorney of Aijaz Shaikh s/o Abdul Ghafoor  by caste Shaikh, Adult, Muslim Resident of Bungalow No.169  Block-E Unit No.6 Latifabad Hyderabad.

            APPLICANT
Hyderabad Sindh
Dated:
ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANT

APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 21 RULE-11 C.P.C

IN THE COURT OF 2ND SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE HYDERABAD
F.C Suit No 63 of 2010
Execution Application No.         Of 2012


MST. ZEENAT BANO Widow of Wali
Muhammad By caste Memon, adult,
muslim, Resident Of House No. 40,
Talibul Moula Colony, New Hala, Taluka
Hala District Matiari            - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -PLAINTIFF


V E R S U S


RAFIQUE AHMED S/o Qasim
By caste Memon, adult muslim,
Resident of Veer Ghatti Mohajir Chowk
Adjacent Mansoora Masjid New Hala
Taluka Hala District Matiari        -------------------DEFENDANT/J.D


APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 21 RULE-11 C.P.C
        The decree holder/plaintiff hereby apply for the executing of the decree herein below set-forth: -


1- No. Of SUIT    F.C Suit No. 63 of 2010      
2- NAME OF PARTIES     As Above      
3- DATE OF JUDGMENT & DECREE    Judgment dated 24-08-2011
Decree dated 27-08-2011      
4- WHETHER ANY APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED FROM THE DECREE?    Civil Appeal No. 211 of 2011
Before District & Session Judge, Hyderabad,      
5- IF APPEAL IS FILED WHAT IS ITS RESULT?    Dismissed      
6- DATE OF JUDGMENT & DECREE PASSED BY APPELLANT COURT.     Judgment dated 08-12-2011
Decree Dated 15-12-2011      
7- WHETHER ANY OTHER APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED FROM THE APPELLANT DECREE?    NO      
8- WHETHER ANY AND
(IF ANY) WHICH PREVIOUS APPLICAITION HAS BEEN MADE FOR THE EXECUTION OF DECREE/ORDER IN DATES OF SUCH APPLICATION AND THEIR RESULT    NO      
9- WHETHER THE ORIGINAL DECREE HOLDER HAS TRANSFERRED ANY PART OF HIS INTEREST IN THE DECREE AND IF ANY THE DATE OF TRANSFER AND NAME AND ADDRESSES OF THE PARTIES TO TRANSFER.    NO      
10- THE AMOUNT WITH INTERST/MARKUP (IF ANY) DUE UPON THE DECREE OF OTHER RELIEF GRANTED THEREBY TOGETHER WITH PARTICULARS OF ANY CROSS DECREE, WHETHER PASSED BEFORE OR AFTER THE DATE OF DECREE SOUGHT TO BE EXECUTED.    NO      
11- THE AMOUNT OF COSTS (IF ANY) AWARDED          
12- DECRETAL AMOUNT    It is ordered by judgment that the suit of the plaintiff is decreed against defendant/D as prayed. So also schedule is given below:      
13- THE NAME OF PERSON AGAINST WHOM THE EXECUTION SOUGHT    Against Defendant/J.D      
14- THE MODE IN WHICH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE COURT IS REQUIRED    1) It is prayed U/O 21 Rule-10 CPC that decree of Trial Court dated 27-08-2010 & Appellant Court Dated: 15-12-2011 may be enforced by the coercive method/process of this Honourable Court or by arresting of defendant/J.D and detention in prison.
2) Any other manner it may be deemed fit by this Honourable Court.      
15- DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTIES SOUGHT TO BE ATTACHED.       

SCHEDULE OF AMOUNT
SR. NO.    PARTICULARS            PERIOD       AMOUNT

A.        Principle Amount                      Rs.82, 000/=
B.        Interest 13% p.a on                            
         Principle Amount                      Rs.10,660/=
i) May 2005 to 11-08-2008                             (10,660 x 3 x 13%)        03-years      Rs.31,980/=
C.        Cost of Suit                           Rs.2830/=___
         Total Amount (A + B + C)              Rs.1,16,810/=

SUBSTANCE

        The above named plaintiff/decree filed Suit for recovery of rent arrears against above named defendant/judgment debtor with pray to direct defendant/judgment debtor to pay arrears of rent amounting to Rs.82,000/- alongwith interest at bank rate, from the month of May, 2005 till handling over the physical possession of suit premises viz. 11-08-2009. Cost of the suit be saddled and any other relief which this Honourable Court deem fit and proper, after admission of the suit, notices issued against the defendant/judgment debtor who appeared and filed written statement. Thereafter, both the parties led their respective evidence and after going through their evidence and hearing the parties, this Honourable Court decreed the suit of plaintiff/decree holder as prayed with costs. Thereafter defendant/judgment debtor filed appeal before District & Session Judge, Hyderabad and same is dismissed with no orders as to cost.

        That, after passing the above both orders of trial court as well as appellant court the defendant/judgment debtor has failed to comply the order of this Honourable Court and no any notice of appeal of the defendant/J.D received by the plaintiff/D.H and the plaintiff/D.H is fully satisfied with the order of this Honourable Court as well as appellant court, hence applicant/decree holder filed this execution application.


(PLAINTIFF/DECREE HOLDER)
(4)
V E R I F I C A T I O N
        I, Mst. Zeenat Bano Widow of Wali Muhammad by caste Memon adult, muslim, Resident of House No. 40, Talibul Moula Colony, New Hala, Taluka Hala District Matiari, at present Hyderabad, do hereby verify on oath that whatever stated above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge & belief

Hyderabad                   
Dated       -02-2012            (DEPONENT/PLAINTIFF/D.H)

            I know the deponent/plaintiff above named.

            ( A D V O C A T E )
Documents filed
Copy of Judgment & decree of Trial Court
Copy of Judgment & decree of Appellant Court


Documents relied upon
Any relevant document

Addresses of the parties
Same as shown in cause title.


Drafted in my office under
The instructions of applicant/D.H



ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANT/D.H