1968 SCMR 198 (PLP)
Malik ALLAH YAR KHAN AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MULTAN AND 2 OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1968 SCMR 198 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | S A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ |
| Parties | Malik ALLAH YAR KHAN AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MULTAN AND 2 OTHERS-Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 SCMR 198 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 SCMR 198 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: S A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 SCMR 198 (PLP) (Malik ALLAH YAR KHAN AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MULTAN AND 2 OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- D. M. Awan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Masud Akhtar, Attorney for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 25th September 1967, in Civil Miscellaneous No. 1 of 1967, in Writ Petition No. 689 of 1967). Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58 (3)-Special leave to appeal-Petition dismissed as having become infructuous.
Judgment & Decree
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, J.-This is a petition for special leave to appeal from an order of a Division Bench of the High Court of West Pakistan at Lahore refusing to stay certain criminal proceedings as also certain steps sought to be taken by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Sargodha, for recovery of moneys alleged to be due from the petitioners. In ibis Court also they had made an application for an ad interim stay prior to the hearing of the petition. The stay was refused on the 1st November 1967, but it was stated in the order that if the peti tioners furnish security in an appropriate sum the question of stay may be re-examined. They renewed their prayer for stay on the 28th November 1967, offering to furnish security. to the extent of their respective shares in the amounts demanded. This was, however, not considered to be sufficient by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, as the liability of the petitioners was considered to be joint and several. The stay was again refused. In these circumstances, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners now states that this petition has become infructuou and does not wish to press the same. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed as having become infructuous. Petition dismissed.