The Supreme Court of Pakistan has held that a party's right to lead evidence cannot be struck off under Order XVII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) when the hearing was adjourned because of a lawyers' strike, a public holiday, a judge's leave or the transfer of a court. The ruling was announced on 6 August 2026 and applies to trial courts across the country.

A penal provision construed strictly

A two-judge bench of Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan said Order XVII Rule 3 is penal in nature and must be construed strictly, and can be invoked only when all conditions prescribed by law are fulfilled. The court found that the trial court had closed the plaintiffs' evidence on 14 October 2009 and dismissed the suit, although the previous hearing had been adjourned because of a lawyers' strike and not because of any request or negligence by the plaintiffs. The basic legal condition for invoking Order XVII Rule 3 was therefore absent.

The restored pre-emption suit

The judgment arose in Shakeel Ahmed and another v Abdul Ghaffar, a suit for possession by pre-emption over 12 kanals of land. The bench set aside the 14 October 2009 order, the trial court's dismissal of the review petition, and the judgments of the appellate court and the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, and remanded the case for fresh adjudication.

What the trial court must now do

  • Restore the suit to its original number.
  • Give the plaintiffs a reasonable opportunity to adduce their evidence.
  • Allow the respondent to lead rebuttal evidence if so advised.
  • Decide the suit afresh in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the Supreme Court's observations on the merits.
  • Endeavour to conclude proceedings within six months of receiving the certified copy of the judgment, fixing day-to-day hearings if necessary.

Wider directions on adjournments

The court expressed concern over unwarranted adjournments and said lawyers should accept only as many cases as they can handle promptly. It directed trial courts to avoid repeated "last opportunity," "final opportunity" or "last and final opportunity" orders, and, where a further adjournment is unavoidable, to record reasons in writing and impose effective costs. The Registrar's Office was directed to circulate the judgment to the Chief Justices of all High Courts, the provincial bar councils and the Islamabad Bar Council.

Parties whose evidence was closed after a strike, holiday, judge's leave or court transfer should review the order against this ruling and seek redress from the court that passed it. The pages reviewed do not publish the judgment's citation or case number, and the full written text could not be verified on the Supreme Court's website at the time of writing.