1986 PLP 716 (SCMR)
WAJID ALI represented by Syed Nasir Ali Shah and others‑‑Petitioners Versus Syed SAJID ALI (represented by Legal Heir) and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 716 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah, Shafiur Rahman and Mian Burhanuddin, Khan, JJ |
| Parties | WAJID ALI represented by Syed Nasir Ali Shah and others‑‑Petitioners Versus Syed SAJID ALI (represented by Legal Heir) and others‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 716 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 716 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah, Shafiur Rahman and Mian Burhanuddin, Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 716 (SCMR) (WAJID ALI represented by Syed Nasir Ali Shah and others‑‑Petitioners Versus Syed SAJID ALI (represented by Legal Heir) and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Q.M. Salim, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 29th January, 1986.
- ‑‑‑Art.188‑‑Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XXVI, r.6‑‑Review petition not drawn by Advocate who appeared at hearing of case sought to be reviewed‑‑No ground for relaxation of rule existing, petition dismissed.
- Even otherwise the review petition has not been drawn by' the Advocate who appeared at the hearing of the case in which the impugned judgment sought to be reviewed was passed, as required by rule 6 Chapter XXVI of the Supreme Court Rules. No good ground for relaxation of this rule exists.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal appeal from the judgment, dated 18‑12‑1984 of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Appeal No. 36 of 1975). (a) Constitution oaf Pakistan (1973)‑‑ ‑‑‑Art.188‑‑Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XXVI, r.6‑‑Review petition not drawn by Advocate who appeared at hearing of case sought to be reviewed‑‑No ground for relaxation of rule existing, petition dismissed. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ ‑‑Art. 188‑‑Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5‑‑Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XXVI, r.2‑‑Time‑barred review petition‑‑No sufficient cause made out for condonation of delay‑‑Petition dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑This petition is barred by 5 days. No. sufficient cause has been made out for condonation of the delay. Even otherwise the review petition has not been drawn by' the Advocate who appeared at the hearing of the case in which the impugned judgment sought to be reviewed was passed, as required by rule 6 Chapter XXVI of the Supreme Court Rules. No good ground for relaxation of this rule exists. This petition is, accordingly dismissed. M.I. Petition dismissed.