Application For Recalling Order: 3 Proven Grounds, Avoid Loss

In civil litigation in Pakistan, once a defendant is served with summons, the law expects a written statement setting out the defence within the time the court allows. This is governed by Order VIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

When that deadline is missed, and the court closes the defendant’s right, either by debarring the defendant from filing the written statement or by proceeding ex parte, the usual remedy is an application for recalling the order and restoring the opportunity to file the written statement.

Missing the deadline happens more often than it should: counsel’s oversight, a wrongly noted hearing date, miscommunication between client and lawyer, illness or a family emergency. The resulting order is not always final. Courts generally prefer to decide disputes on merits rather than on technicalities, so a well-supported application has a real chance, while a vague one almost never does.

Legal Provisions Behind an Application for Recalling Order

Order VIII Rule 1 CPC: Time for the Written Statement

The defendant presents the written statement at or before the first hearing, or within the time the court permits. In practice, courts commonly fix about 30 days from service of summons, and they can allow more time where sufficient cause is shown.

Order VIII Rule 10 CPC: Failure to File

If the written statement is not presented within the time fixed, the court can pronounce judgment against the defendant or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit. That wording gives the court room to choose an order other than judgment, and a recall application asks the court to use that room in the defendant’s favour.

Section 151 CPC: Inherent Powers

There is no dedicated CPC provision that automatically restores the right to file a written statement once it is closed. Applications are therefore usually filed under Section 151 CPC read with Order VIII CPC, asking the court to recall its own order to secure the ends of justice.

Order IX Rules 6, 7 and 13 CPC: When the Court Proceeds Ex Parte

If the court has proceeded ex parte but no decree has been passed yet, Order IX Rule 7 CPC allows a defendant who appears and shows good cause for the earlier non-appearance to be heard, on such terms as to costs or otherwise as the court directs. This rule is often missed in recall applications, and it should be cited where the order is an ex parte order.

If an ex parte decree has already been passed, the remedy is different: an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to set the decree aside, within the limitation period. This guide deals with applications made before a decree.

The 3 Grounds Courts Commonly Accept for Recalling an Order

Whatever the ground, the test running through all of them is whether sufficient cause is shown for the default. The principle behind it is that no party should be condemned unheard, which is rooted in Article 10-A of the Constitution of Pakistan (right to a fair trial).

Genuine mistake or inadvertence. For example, counsel noted the wrong date, a message between client and counsel was missed, or a notice was misunderstood. Courts do not treat every counsel error alike, so the explanation must be specific and honest.
Circumstances beyond the defendant’s control. Illness, bereavement, an emergency or necessary travel, supported by proof such as a medical certificate or travel record.
Procedural irregularity or error in the original order. For example, defective service of summons, an order passed without the defendant having proper notice, or a misunderstanding of what the order actually required.

Step-by-Step Procedure for Filing an Application for Recalling Order

Identify the order to be recalled. Get a certified copy of the specific order that debarred the written statement or proceeded ex parte. The application must refer to its exact date and terms.
Establish the ground. Decide which of the three grounds genuinely applies and collect proof before drafting.
Draft the application under Section 151 CPC read with Order VIII CPC (and Order IX Rule 7 CPC for ex parte orders), explaining with dates and facts why the delay was not deliberate, and what defence the defendant will lose if not restored.
File before the same court that passed the original order, not an appellate or different forum.
Attach a supporting affidavit. Courts generally expect one where the explanation involves personal circumstances such as illness, bereavement or travel.
Expect notice to the plaintiff. Where the matter is contested, the plaintiff’s side is usually allowed to respond before the application is decided.
Court’s order. If satisfied that sufficient cause exists, the court recalls the earlier order and restores the right, usually giving a fresh and limited time.
File the written statement promptly. Courts are far less sympathetic to a second delay after already granting a recall.

Documents to Prepare Before Filing

Certified copy of the order sought to be recalled.
Affidavit in support, addressing the specific reason for the delay.
Proof of the stated ground, such as a medical certificate, travel documents, a death certificate or correspondence showing the genuine oversight.
Vakalatnama, where filed through counsel.
A short note of the defence or documents the defendant will rely on if restored. Courts respond better to an application that shows there is something real to defend.

Where These Applications Commonly Run Into Trouble

Vague explanations. “The delay was unintentional” with no dates or facts rarely succeeds.
No supporting proof. An illness or family emergency claimed without a document is much weaker than the same claim with paper behind it.
Delay in filing the recall application itself. If the order was passed months ago and the application comes only when the case is about to be decided, the court will ask why the defendant waited.
No mention of a genuine defence. Asking only to be let back in, without showing what will be defended, weakens the application.
Repeated defaults. A recall sought after a second or third missed deadline is judged far more strictly than a first lapse, because courts begin to suspect delay tactics.
Wrong remedy. Using Section 151 alone for an ex parte order, without Order IX Rule 7 CPC, or using a recall application when an ex parte decree already exists and Order IX Rule 13 CPC is the correct route.

Format of Application for Recalling Order and Restoring the Side of Defendants for Filing of Written Statement

Adapt the facts, dates and grounds to your case and delete any paragraph that does not apply.

IN THE COURT OF ________ SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KARACHI DISTRICT ________

CIVIL SUIT NO. ______ OF 20____

ABC …………………………………. PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

XYZ & OTHERS …………………………………. DEFENDANTS

APPLICATION FOR RECALLING ORDER DATED ________ AND RESTORING THE SIDE OF DEFENDANT(S) NO. ____ FOR FILING OF WRITTEN STATEMENT, UNDER SECTION 151 CPC READ WITH ORDER VIII CPC

Respectfully Sheweth:

That the above suit is pending before this Honourable Court and the Defendant(s) No. ____ was / were served on ________.
That vide order dated ________ this Honourable Court [debarred the Defendant(s) from filing the written statement / proceeded ex parte against the Defendant(s)].
That the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional, and occurred because ____________ [state the ground with exact dates and facts: counsel’s mistake in noting the date / illness from ____ to ____ / bereavement on ____ / travel from ____ to ____ / defect in service].
That the above facts are supported by ____________ [medical certificate / travel record / correspondence], annexed as Annexure A to ____, and by the affidavit of the Defendant(s).
That the Defendant(s) filed this application promptly, within ____ days of learning of the order / of the circumstances ending.
That the Defendant(s) has / have a genuine defence and documentary evidence, namely ____________, which is important to defend rights and interest in the suit.
That no prejudice will be caused to the Plaintiff, who can be compensated by costs, and the Defendant(s) undertake(s) to file the written statement on the date fixed by this Honourable Court.
[For ex parte orders] That the Defendant(s) appear(s) before this Honourable Court and assign(s) good cause for earlier non-appearance, as contemplated by Order IX Rule 7 CPC.

PRAYER

It is therefore respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to recall the order dated ________, restore the side of the Defendant(s) No. ____ for filing of the written statement, and grant any other relief deemed fit in the interest of justice, so that the matter may be decided on merits instead of technicalities.

KARACHI

DATED: ____________

ADVOCATE FOR THE DEFENDANT(S) NO. ____

The facts and grounds stated above are placeholders for illustration only and do not relate to any real case.

Conclusion

An application for recalling order is one of the more common and genuinely important remedies in civil practice. It stands between a defendant and the loss of the entire right to defend a suit over what is often a procedural lapse and not a substantive failing.

Because the court is not limited to passing judgment under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC, and because Section 151 CPC (and Order IX Rule 7 CPC for ex parte orders) allow the court to correct its own course in the interest of justice, a well-supported application with specific facts, real proof and a genuine defence has a solid chance. The applications that struggle treat the explanation as a formality instead of building it with dates, documents and a clear account of what is at stake.

For related civil procedure work, see our guide on the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay, and for foundational drafting practice, see how to draft a Vakalatnama in Pakistan.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. What happens if a defendant misses the deadline to file a Written Statement under Order VIII CPC?

Under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC, if a defendant fails to file the Written Statement within the fixed time, the Court may pronounce judgment against them or pass any other order it considers appropriate, including debarring the defendant from filing the Written Statement. This consequence is discretionary the rule says “may,” not “must,” leaving room for the Court to act otherwise depending on the circumstances.

Q2. Is there a fixed time limit for filing a Written Statement under CPC?

Yes. Under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC, a defendant must file the Written Statement at or before the first hearing, or within such time as the Court permits, ordinarily not more than 30 days from the date of service of summons. Courts retain discretion to extend this where sufficient cause is shown.

Q3. Does the CPC have an express provision allowing automatic restoration of the right to file a Written Statement?

No. There is no express provision automatically restoring this right once closed. Courts instead rely on their inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 CPC to recall the earlier order and restore the defendant’s opportunity to file the Written Statement.

Q4. What are the typical legal grounds relied upon for recalling such an order?

Common grounds include mistake or inadvertence in noting the hearing date (such as counsel’s error), procedural irregularity or court error in passing the original order, exceptional circumstances genuinely beyond the defendant’s control, and the constitutional principle of audi alteram partem under Article 10-A of the Constitution of Pakistan.

Q5. Before which court should the Application for Recalling Order be filed?

Before the same Court that passed the original debarring or ex parte order not an appellate forum. The Court needs its own file and order sheet to verify and recall its own order.

Q6. What kind of explanation does the Court expect for the delay in filing the Written Statement?

Courts expect a clear, specific, and genuine explanation showing the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional, tied to actual dates and facts rather than a general statement, and ideally supported by documentary proof.

Q7. Why is it important to mention the defendant’s defence or evidence in the recall application itself?

Because courts are more inclined to exercise discretion in favour of restoration where there’s a genuine defence at stake. An application that only apologizes for the delay, without indicating what the defendant stands to lose, is weaker than one that shows real documentary evidence exists to defend the claim.

Q8. Does the opposing party get a chance to respond before the recall application is decided?

In most contested matters, yes, the Court typically issues notice to the plaintiff’s side, who may oppose the recall, before deciding whether to restore the defendant’s right to file the Written Statement.

Q9. What happens if a defendant is granted recall but then misses the fresh deadline again?

Courts are markedly less sympathetic to repeated defaults. A second lapse after an order has already been recalled once is often treated as evidence of deliberate delay rather than genuine hardship, making a further recall application much harder to succeed on.

Q10. What is the difference between an ex parte order and an ex parte decree?

An ex parte order means the court is proceeding without the defendant but no decree has been passed. Order IX Rule 7 CPC is applicable then. An ex parte decree is the final decree, and it must be challenged through an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC within the limitation period.

Disclaimer

The format and information provided above are for educational and reference purposes only. They are intended to offer general guidance on legal drafting and procedure and should not be treated as legal advice. Each case depends on its own specific facts, applicable law, and court practice; users are advised to modify the format according to their particular circumstances and seek professional legal advice as necessary.

Introduction