2004 PLP 1358 (SCMR)
KARAM DIN — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Collector, Mianwali and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2004 PLP 1358 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | KARAM DIN — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Collector, Mianwali and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 1358 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 1358 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 1358 (SCMR) (KARAM DIN — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Collector, Mianwali and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- C.M. Latif Rawn, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and M Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 15th May, 2002.
- 2. An application has been filed seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the petitioner was indisposed. However, no medical A certificate has been appended with this application. We asked the learned counsel for petitioner to explain as to how in absence of medical certificate, we can entertain the plea of petitioner. He candidly conceded that in absence of medical certificate, plea of petitioner being indisposed cannot be entertained.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 13-4-1999 passed by Lahore High Court. Lahore in Writ Petition No. 6491 of 1999).
Art. 185(3)
Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XIII, R.1
Petittor, barred by 18 days
Petitioner's plea of being indisposed could not be entertained in absence of medical certificate, thus, delay in filing petition was not condoned
Supreme Court dismissed petition being barred by time.
Judgment & Decree
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.
This petition is barred by 18 days.
2. An application has been filed seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the petitioner was indisposed. However, no medical A certificate has been appended with this application. We asked the learned counsel for petitioner to explain as to how in absence of medical certificate, we can entertain the plea of petitioner. He candidly conceded that in absence of medical certificate, plea of petitioner being indisposed cannot be entertained. In view of the above situation, we are of the opinion that in absence of medical certificate we cannot entertain the plea of petitioner being indisposed, therefore, delay in filing of petition cannot be condoned. As such petition is dismissed being barred by time. S.A.K./K-63/S Petition dismissed.