SCMR 1976

1976 PLP 221 (SCMR)

ABDUL GHANI — Appellant Versus NAWAB DIN — ‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Civil Appeal No. 59 of 1975, decided on 19th January 1976.
Honorable Judges
Anwarul Haq and Muhammad Gul, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1976 PLP 221 (SCMR)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members Anwarul Haq and Muhammad Gul, JJ
Parties ABDUL GHANI — Appellant Versus NAWAB DIN — ‑Respondent
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973) .
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1976 PLP 221 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) . as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1976 PLP 221 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Anwarul Haq and Muhammad Gul, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1976 PLP 221 (SCMR) (ABDUL GHANI — Appellant Versus NAWAB DIN — ‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973) .

Representation

  • Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant.
  • Date of hearing : 19th January 1976.
  • -----Art 185(3)‑Leave to appeal granted but appellant despite letters from his Advocate on record and direct notice from Court failing to file concise statement and deposit security for costs‑Appeal dismissed for non‑prosecution.
  • In spite of Issuance of notices the learned Advocate‑on‑Record for the appellant failed to file a concise statement and to deposit the security for costs.
  • Sh. Abdul Karim, learned Advocate‑on‑Record for the appellant has appeared before us in response to the notice of this Court dated the 31st of December 1975. He states that he has written several letters to the appellant but without any response. He further points out that a copy of the notice of this Court was also sent directly to the appellant Abdul Ghani, but even then he has failed to turn up and to co‑operate with the Advocate -on‑Record for completing this appeal. In these circumstances, Sh. Abdul Karim requests for permission to withdraw from the appeal.
  • As the appellant has failed to take steps to complete the appeal, in spite of letters from his Advocate‑on‑Record and direct notice from this Court, we dismiss the appeal for non‑prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.

Headnotes / Summary

Art 185(3)‑Leave to appeal granted but appellant despite letters from his Advocate on record and direct notice from Court failing to file concise statement and deposit security for costsAppeal dismissed for non‑prosecution. Respondent in person.

Judgment & Decree

ANWARUL HAQ, J.

In this case leave to appeal was granted on the 1st of October, 1973, and an order was also passed directing the maintenance of status quo as to possession during the pendency of the appeal. The appeal was directed to be heard on the present record during the week commencing from the 24th of November 1975. In spite of Issuance of notices the learned Advocate‑on‑Record for the appellant failed to file a concise statement and to deposit the security for costs. Sh. Abdul Karim, learned Advocate‑on‑Record for the appellant has appeared before us in response to the notice of this Court dated the 31st of December 1975. He states that he has written several letters to the appellant but without any response. He further points out that a copy of the notice of this Court was also sent directly to the appellant Abdul Ghani, but even then he has failed to turn up and to co‑operate with the Advocate -on‑Record for completing this appeal. In these circumstances, Sh. Abdul Karim requests for permission to withdraw from the appeal. As the appellant has failed to take steps to complete the appeal, in spite of letters from his Advocate‑on‑Record and direct notice from this Court, we dismiss the appeal for non‑prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed,