1997SCMR1338 (PLP)
ABDUL WAHID‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Syed Haji ABDUL WADOOD‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1997SCMR1338 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, Raja Afrasiab Khan and Muhammad Bashir Khan Jehangiri, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL WAHID‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Syed Haji ABDUL WADOOD‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997SCMR1338 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997SCMR1338 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, Raja Afrasiab Khan and Muhammad Bashir Khan Jehangiri, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997SCMR1338 (PLP) (ABDUL WAHID‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Syed Haji ABDUL WADOOD‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- ‑‑‑‑S. 151‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Application through Fax for adjournment of case on account of counsel's serious family problems‑‑ Supreme Court had notified for all concerned in cause list that no application through Fax would be entertained and in case counsel was unable to appear before Court, Advocate‑on‑Record must be present on date of hearing‑‑‑Counsel as well as Advocate‑on‑Record being absent, request for adjournment received through Fax was rejected‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed for non -prosecution.
- Nemo for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Aslam Chishti, Advocate Supreme Court and S.A.M. Quadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent.
- There is an application sent by Mr. M.W.N. Kohli, Advocate‑on Record, for the petitioner through Fax for adjournment on the ground that Syed Ayaz Zahoor counsel for the petitioner is unable to attend the Court due to his "serious family problems". It has been notified for all concerned in the cause list that no application through Fax will be entertained and in case the counsel is unable to appear before the Court the Advocate‑on‑Record, must be present on the date of hearing. The counsel as well as the Advocate‑on‑Record, are absent. The requests for adjournment received through Fax is rejected.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, dated 23‑8‑1995 in C.R. No. 169/95). Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑
Judgment & Decree
There is an application sent by Mr. M.W.N. Kohli, Advocate‑on Record, for the petitioner through Fax for adjournment on the ground that Syed Ayaz Zahoor counsel for the petitioner is unable to attend the Court due to his "serious family problems". It has been notified for all concerned in the cause list that no application through Fax will be entertained and in case the counsel is unable to appear before the Court the Advocate‑on‑Record, must be present on the date of hearing. The counsel as well as the Advocate‑on‑Record, are absent. The requests for adjournment received through Fax is rejected. The petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution and stay order dated 4‑9‑1995 is vacated. A.A./A‑1405/S Petition dismissed.