1976 PLP 289 (SCMR)
REHMATULLAH‑ — Appellant Versus NISAR AHMAD AND OTHERS — ‑Respondents
| Citation | 1976 PLP 289 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ----Adjournment‑‑Telegraphic request by appellant's counsel for adjournment of appeal on ground of counsel being required to appear in his personal case in another district‑No justification for absence of Advocate‑on.‑record‑No work left for Court to be occupied‑No option but to dismiss appeal for non‑prosecution. Adjournment. |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | REHMATULLAH‑ — Appellant Versus NISAR AHMAD AND OTHERS — ‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Appeal‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1976 PLP 289 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Appeal‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1976 PLP 289 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ----Adjournment‑‑Telegraphic request by appellant's counsel for adjournment of appeal on ground of counsel being required to appear in his personal case in another district‑No justification for absence of Advocate‑on.‑record‑No work left for Court to be occupied‑No option but to dismiss appeal for non‑prosecution. Adjournment. bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1976 PLP 289 (SCMR) (REHMATULLAH‑ — Appellant Versus NISAR AHMAD AND OTHERS — ‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Appellant.
- Masood Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 1.
- Date of hearing : 12th December 1975.
- ----Adjournment‑‑Telegraphic request by appellant's counsel for adjournment of appeal on ground of counsel being required to appear in his personal case in another district‑No justification for absence of Advocate‑on.‑record‑No work left for Court to be occupied‑No option but to dismiss appeal for non‑prosecution. [Adjournment].
- Whatever be the reason for which Mr. Fazal‑i‑Mahmood is absent, we see no justification for the absence of the Advocate‑on‑Record for the appellant As observed in the order we have passed today in Civil Appeal No. 99 of 1970, only three appeals were fixed for today, but none of them could be heard as counsel for the appellants were absent. Consequent upon it there is not work to keep the Court occupied for the today. As this is a sad state of affairs we have no option, but to dismiss this appeal for non‑prosecution. There will be no order as to costs.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from, the judgment and order of the High Court Lahore, dated 25‑1‑1968, in Writ Petition No. 610 of 1960).
Adjournment‑‑Telegraphic request by appellant's counsel for adjournment of appeal on ground of counsel being required to appear in his personal case in another district‑No justification for absence of Advocate‑on.‑record‑No work left for Court to be occupied‑No option but to dismiss appeal for non‑prosecution. [Adjournment]. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 : Ex parte.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, C. J.‑‑‑‑Mr. Fazal‑i‑Mahmood, counsel for the appellant, has sent a telegraphic request for adjournment to the second Bench, before which he had to appear in another case. It is stated in the telegram that Mr. Fazal‑i‑Mahmood, has o appear at Lahore in a personal case. Whatever be the reason for which Mr. Fazal‑i‑Mahmood is absent, we see no justification for the absence of the Advocate‑on‑Record for the appellant As observed in the order we have passed today in Civil Appeal No. 99 of 1970, only three appeals were fixed for today, but none of them could be heard as counsel for the appellants were absent. Consequent upon it there is not work to keep the Court occupied for the today. As this is a sad state of affairs we have no option, but to dismiss this appeal for non‑prosecution. There will be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.