2003 SCMR 936 (PLP)
ABDUL MAJEED — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2003 SCMR 936 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Khalll-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL MAJEED — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 SCMR 936 (PLP)?
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 SCMR 936 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Khalll-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 SCMR 936 (PLP) (ABDUL MAJEED — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S.M. K. Lodhi, Advocate Supreme Court with -Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 26th April, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 6-12-2001 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No. 10785 of 2000).
S. 35-A
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 185(3) & 199-- Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court
Awarding of special costs-- Non-compliance of order passed by High Court
Petitioner was burdened by High Court with special costs and he did not comply with the direction for payments of costs
Plea raised by the counsel of the petitioner was that he wanted time as the petitioner had gone for arranging money
Effect
Supreme Court declined to grant the request so as to prolong the uncalled for litigation
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
S.M. K. Lodhi, Advocate Supreme Court with -Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 26th April, 2002. TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J,
Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 6-12-2001 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Writ Petition No. 10785 of 2000 filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The impugned order was passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, on 6-12-2001 burdening the petitioner with special costs of Rs.10,000 to be paid to respondents No.2 and 3 for embroiling them in uncalled for litigation in spite of the fact that no restraint order was passed. `The petitioner has not complied with the direction of the learned Single Judge in spite of the fact that no restraint order is in the field. On 25-4-2002 when this petition came up for hearing we asked the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner regarding payment of the costs to respondents Nos.2 and 3 as awarded by the learned Single Judge. The case was, accordingly, adjourned for today. The direction for payment of costs, even till today, has not been complied with and the learned counsel again wants time as, according to him, the petitioner has gone for arranging money. We are not persuaded to grant this request made by the learned counsel so as to prolong this uncalled for litigation. The instant petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Q.M.H./A-275/S Petition dismissed.