1983 PLP 71 (PLC)
OBAIDULLAH KHAN Versus LABOUR COURT No. V, KARACHI AND OTHERS
| Citation | 1983 PLP 71 (PLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | B. G. N. Kazi, J |
| Parties | OBAIDULLAH KHAN Versus LABOUR COURT No. V, KARACHI AND OTHERS |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 PLP 71 (PLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983 PLP 71 (PLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: B. G. N. Kazi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 PLP 71 (PLC) (OBAIDULLAH KHAN Versus LABOUR COURT No. V, KARACHI AND OTHERS). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- --‑‑Art. 199 and Limitation :Act (IX of 1908), S. 5‑Condona tion of delay‑Notice, service of‑Bailiff through inadvertence leaving notice for petitioner on table of clerk without obtaining his signature and as such notice could not be served‑Non‑service of notice about pronouncement of judgment, held, a valid ground for condonation of delay in filing of appeal.
Judgment & Decree
This is an application by petitioner, Mr. Obaidullah Khan alleging that he had no notice about the pronouncement of Judgment on 14th January, 1981 but he came to know about the decision on 23rd May, 1981 when he had come to inquire about the matter. The argument in C.P. No. S‑87/78 were heard on 1st November, 1980, 23rd November, 1980 and 23rd December, 1980 and the judgment was re served. The judgment was announced on 14th January, 1981 of which date notice had been ordered to be issued to the parties. The report called from Nazir of this Court shows that the notice for the parties was issued to the Bailiff on 11th January, 1981 and he served one copy of the notice on respondent Labour Court No. 5 on 13th Jan uary, 1981 but he could not serve notice upon the petitioner and through inadvertence, he left notice on the table of the Clerk without obtaining signature. It is therefore obvious that the notice about the announcement of judgment on 14th January, 1981 was not served on Mr. Obaidullah Khan, the petitioner, although there was no indication on the record that the same had not been served. The judgment was announced on the merits and the question of delay in the same coming to his knowledge could only be taken as the ground B for condonation of delay in filing appeal if any. The petitioner if so advised can take such ground for condonation of the delay. He is inform ed accordingly. Order accordingly.