2005 PLP 158 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD AZAM and another — Petitioners Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (PREV.), HEADQUARTER, KARACHI and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2005 PLP 158 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AZAM and another — Petitioners Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (PREV.), HEADQUARTER, KARACHI and 3 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 158 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 158 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 158 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD AZAM and another — Petitioners Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (PREV.), HEADQUARTER, KARACHI and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Saleem Samoo for Petitioner.
- Raja Muhammad Iqbal for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
Headnotes / Summary
O. XLVII, R.1 & S.151
Only ground urged by the petitioner was that while passing the order, in a Constitutional petition, Division Bench of the High Court did not properly appreciate a cited judgment though reference of the said case was available in the admission order by the Court
Validity--Such ground could be a ground for consideration in appeal but looking at the limited scope of review it could not be made basis for review, moreso when reasons recorded by the Division Bench for dismissing the Constitutional petition were different and there was no reference in it about citing of the said case at the time of hearing of the Constitutional petition.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Saleem Samoo for Petitioner. Raja Muhammad Iqbal for Respondents Nos. 1 to
3. S. Ziauddin Nasir, Standing Counsel. Through listed application under Order 47, rule 1 read with section 151, C.P.C. (Misc. A. No.3840 of 1998), which is pending for adjudication for more than six years, the petitioners have sought review of short order dated 12-8-1998, which was followed by judgment, dated 25th August, 1998 it is pertinent .to mention here that though judgment containing detailed reasons was also delivered before filing of instant application on 1-1-1998, but no review has been sought in that regard. We have heard Mr. Muhammad Saleem Samoo, learned counsel for the petitioner. The only ground urged by him for seeking review of the order dated 12-8-1998 passed in this petition is that while passing such order learned Division Bench did not properly appreciate the case of M. Hameedullah Khan v. Director Customs Intelligence and others 1992 CLC 57 though reference of this judgment in this case is available in the admission order, dated 28-11-1991. In our view this may be a ground for consideration in appeal but looking the limited scope of review it cannot be made basis for review of order dated 12-8-1998 or the judgment dated 25-8-1998 passed in this petition. Moreso, when the reasons recorded by the Division Bench for dismissing this petition are different and there is no reference in it about citing of above case at the time of hearing of this petition. In view of the above this application is dismissed. M.B.A./M-148/K Application dismissed.