1986 PLP 1624 (SCMR)
MULLAH AHMED — Appellant Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, Sibi and 7 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1624 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Qadir Shaikh, S.A. Nusrat and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ |
| Parties | MULLAH AHMED — Appellant Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, Sibi and 7 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1624 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1624 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Qadir Shaikh, S.A. Nusrat and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1624 (SCMR) (MULLAH AHMED — Appellant Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, Sibi and 7 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S.A. Quadri, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant.
- Iftikhar Muhammad, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos.5 to 8.
- Date of hearing: 6th May, 1986.
- S.A. Quadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant.
- Iftikhar Muhammad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos.5 to 8.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Baluchistan High Court, Quetta, dated 2-11-1981, in Revision Appeal No. 5 of 1981).
S. 5--Limitation--Condonation of delay--Appeal time-barred--Oral submission made for condonation of delay, held, would not make availed justification--Appeal dismissed as time-barred.
Art. 185--Appeal before Supreme Court--Constitutional petition dismissed by High Court--Review petition against that order also dismissed for reasons with which no exception in law could be taken- Appeal before Supreme Court being devoid of merits, dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
(b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ ‑‑‑Art. 185‑‑Appeal before Supreme Court‑‑Constitutional petition dismissed by High Court‑‑Review petition against that order also dismissed for reasons with which no exception in law could be taken‑ Appeal before Supreme Court being devoid of merits, dismissed. S.A. Quadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant. Iftikhar Muhammad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos.5 to
8. Date of hearing: 6th May, 1986. ABDUL QADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑This appeal by leave is directed against the two judgments of the Baluchistan High Court, dated ltt‑6‑1981 and 2‑11‑1981, by the former judgment, a constitution petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed, and by the latter, review petition filed by him also met with the same fate. Learned counsel for the respondents raised the preliminary objection that although the appeal is within time so as the judgment, dated 2‑11‑1981 is concerned, it is totally time‑barred against the judgment, dated 10‑6‑1981. This position is conceded by the learned counsel for the appellant who, however, prays that the delay may be condoned. The oral submissions made by him for the condonation of the delay do not make out valid justification for the condonation, we therefore, treat this appeal as time‑barred against the impugned order of the High Court, dated 10‑6‑1981 by which constitution petition was dismissed. So far as impugned order of the High Court, dated 2‑11‑1981 is concerned, we find that the High Court has dismissed the review application filed by the petitioner for the reasons with which no exception in law can be taken. The appeal, therefore, has no merit and is accordingly dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs. M . I . Appeal dismissed.