2003 PLP 964 (SCMR)
SULTAN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD FEROZE — Respondent
| Citation | 2003 PLP 964 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Tanvir Ahmed Khan, JJ |
| Parties | SULTAN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD FEROZE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 964 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 964 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Tanvir Ahmed Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 964 (SCMR) (SULTAN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD FEROZE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zahid Hussain Khan, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 27th June, 2002
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order, dated 27-9-1999 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Civil Revision No: 602-D of 1984).
S. 115
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Filing of restoration application after a period of 4 years
High Court dismissed the application being time barred
No legal infirmity or any misreading was found in the order of High Court warranting interference by Supreme Court
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the order, dated 27-9-1999 of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby C.Ms. Nos. 1-C and 2-C of 1999 in Civil Revision No.602-D of 1984 filed by the petitioner were dismissed. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a suit on 25-10-1981 claiming relief of specific performance of an agreement to sell land measuring 35 Kanals, 3 Marlas or in the alternative, a decree for recovery of Rs.38,000 was prayed for. The respondent contested the same and the trial Court through its judgment, dated 8-10-1983 decreed the suit. However, on appeal filed by the respondent, learned Additional District Judge, Jauharabad, reversed the above judgment and dismissed the suit. The petitioner filed Civil Revision No.602-D of 1984 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore which has been dismissed for non-prosecution by a learned Single Judge through his order, dated 22-2-1995. After a period of about four years the petitioner filed an application for restoration of aforesaid civil revision but the same has been dismissed on the ground of limitation. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal. We have considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel and have gone through the entire documents appended with this petition carefully. Learned counsel failed to point out any legal infirmity or any misreading in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. Even otherwise, the petitioner has got no case on merits. In this view of the matter, this petition being devoid of any force is dismissed and leave declined. M.H./S-271/S Petition dismissed