1984 PLP 1534 (SCMR)
ESSO EASTERN INCORPORATION and another‑‑Appellants Versus ARK NAVIGATION COMPANY OF PAKISTAN Ltd. and another‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1984 PLP 1534 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Kadir Shaikh and S.A. Nusrat, JJ |
| Parties | ESSO EASTERN INCORPORATION and another‑‑Appellants Versus ARK NAVIGATION COMPANY OF PAKISTAN Ltd. and another‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 PLP 1534 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1984 PLP 1534 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Kadir Shaikh and S.A. Nusrat, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 PLP 1534 (SCMR) (ESSO EASTERN INCORPORATION and another‑‑Appellants Versus ARK NAVIGATION COMPANY OF PAKISTAN Ltd. and another‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Fateh ali W. Wellani, Advocate Supreme Court and Yousuf Rafi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 4th June, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of High Court of Sind at Karachi, dated 24th October, 1983 passed in J.M. No. 40 of 1975). Constitution of Pakistan(1973)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.149 and O.XXXIII rr. 1, 2 & 15‑‑Application to sue as forma pauperis‑‑Limitation‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider whether respondent was entitled to continue original application in forma pauperis earlier dismissed by High Court and his appeal dismissed by Supreme Court as barred by time. Respondent No. 1 in person.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑ Facts of this case briefly stated are that the First respondent's application under Order XXXIII, rules 1 and 2 , C . P . C . was rejected by the Additional Registrar of Sind High Court by the order, dated 29th August, 1978 and respondent's appeal against this order was also dismissed by a learned Judge of that High Court by the judgment, dated 5th November, 1978 on the ground that the application did not reveal a cause of action. The claim was time‑barred and the respondent was also not found to be a pauper. Leave to appeal was granted by this Court from the judgment of the High Court but finally the appeal was dismissed as barred by time. While dismissing the appeal this Court however observed that "the petitioner (respondent), if he chooses to pursue the matter further by making payment of the court‑fee, if so advised, may do so by making an application under Order XXXIII, rule 15 and section 149, C.P.C. before the learned trial Court. The question of limitation in the suit will also be decided by the said Court after considering all available pleas to be raised by either side". Afterwards, the respondent applied for extension of time to pay the court‑fee whereupon a learned Judge in the High Court allowed his request and granted three months' time. The respondent has made up the court‑fees, and the original pauper application has been registered as a suit. Petitioners who were the defendants in the case now seek leave to appeal from the order of the learned Judge in the High Court, and it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on their behalf that respondent was not entitled to continue the original application in forma pauperis since it had earlier been dismissed by the High Court and respondent's appeal against the order of the High Court was also dismissed by this Court as barred by time. This and the other submissions made in respect of the petition deserve consideration. We, therefore, grant leave to appeal and allow the petition. Security Rs. 2,
000. The appeal will be heard on the present record soon after summer vacation 1984. It would, however, be open to the parties to file additional documents, if any. The proceedings in the suit arising out of J.M. 40 of 1975 between the parties shall be held in abeyance till the appeal is decided. S.Q.???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave granted.