Judges should not act as judicial technicians: LHC

By: News Desk
Published: 01:21 PM, 14 Jul, 2021
Judges should not act as judicial technicians: LHC
Caption: File photo.
Stay tuned with 24 News HD Android App
Get it on Google Play

The Lahore High Court has set aside a civil court’s decision regarding the dismissal of a case on the grounds of not amending the petition as directed by the lower court, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.

LHC Justice Shahid Waheed on Wednesday released a detailed judgement consisting of 12 pages on the plea of Akif Ali Shah. The petitioner has challenged the decision of the civil court which dismissed his petition on technical grounds.

According to the LHC judgement, despite the orders of the court if the petitioner does not amend his application, the court still could not dismiss his application. It was not a very big mistake on the part of the petitioner that he did not carry out the amendments to the petition and the court, on this ground, could dismiss his application.

Justice Waheed remarked that though it was against the court rule not to amend the application but the court could not fix the fault by taking suo motu action. 

The judgement said that judges should not act as judicial technicians, adding that the courts should not present themselves as a workshop of technical justice. 

Justice Waheed stated that there was a proverb that technical ground weakens the justice. He further remarked that the use of technical ground did not correct the mistake. He observed that this case provoked us to think whether we should penalize those who came to the court to seek justice. 

Petitioner Akif Shah had filed his petition in the civil court regarding the purchase of a house in Faisal Town. The civil court dismissed his petition on the grounds that the petitioner did not file an amended petition as ordered by the court. Petitioner appealed the civil court decision in sessions court where his petition also rejected. After that he submitted his case in the LHC. 

The LHC has sent the petition back to civil court directing it to decide the case on merit. The court also imposed a fine on the petitioner for not amending his claim.