1994 PLP 2207 (MLD)
IMPORT AGENCIES and others — Petitioners Versus SPECIAL JUDGE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 2207 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Malik Muhammad Qayyum, |
| Parties | IMPORT AGENCIES and others — Petitioners Versus SPECIAL JUDGE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 2207 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 2207 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Malik Muhammad Qayyum,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 2207 (MLD) (IMPORT AGENCIES and others — Petitioners Versus SPECIAL JUDGE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Jawahar A. Naqvee for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Art.199
Exercise of
Where interim order was passed by Special Court (Banking) in proper exercise of its jurisdiction without violating any provision of law, no Constitutional petition could be maintained against such interim order.
Judgment & Decree
The petitioner feels aggrieved of certain orders passed by the Special Court (Banking) constituted under the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979.
2. The contention of the learned counsel is that notwithstanding the fact that the learned counsel for the plaintiff had not appeared on certain dates of hearing nor any process fee has been deposited, yet the learned Special Judge (Banking) adjourned the case and granted further time to the plaintiff to furnish process fee. The other contention is that the application for leave appear and defend the suit has been dismissed by the Court without due-application of mind.
3. I am afraid, the, contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be examined in the present proceedings. In the absence of any challenge to the jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge or the vires of any law, no Constitutional petition can be maintained against interim orders passed by the Special Court. The petitioner can raise all these questions at the time of filing of an appeal if the ultimate decision of the suit is against him. With these observations, this petition is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./I-110/L Petition dismissed.