2005 PLP 1469 (PTD)
ALTAF HUSSAIN through Lawful Attorney Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM and 5 others
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1469 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Anwar Zaheer Jamali and S. Ali Aslam Jafri, JJ |
| Parties | ALTAF HUSSAIN through Lawful Attorney Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM and 5 others |
| Primary Law | Customs Act (IV of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1469 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1469 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Anwar Zaheer Jamali and S. Ali Aslam Jafri, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1469 (PTD) (ALTAF HUSSAIN through Lawful Attorney Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM and 5 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sami Ahsan for Petitioner.
- Raja Muhammad Iqbal for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 168 & 194-A
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Confiscation of vehicle and imposition of penalty
Petitioner had conceded in his Constitutional petition that all grounds urged in the Constitutional petition had been taken by the petitioner in his appeal which was pending before the Appellate Tribunal
Effect
Such being the position it was evident that not only adequate alternate remedy was available to the petitioner against the orders impugned in the Constitutional petition but such remedy had already been availed by him
No valid justification, in circumstances, was available for the High Court to entertain the Constitutional petition at such a stage
Petition was dismissed in limine with the observation that Appellate Tribunal shall hear and dispose of the pending appeal of the petitioner within two months from the date of communication of order of the High Court. Date hearing: 4th November, 2004.
Judgment & Decree
ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI, J.
By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders, dated 8-7-2004 and 31-12-2003 passed by respondents Nos. 3 and 4 respectively, whereby vehicle bearing registration No. CJ-3660, Toyota Hiace. Chassis No. LH-110-0001888, Engine No.21-2151076 was ordered to be confiscated with penalty of Rs.1,00,
000. In the memo. of petition, while narrating the relevant facts of the case, in para. 30 of the petition, the petitioner has specifically stated that against the impugned orders an appeal has been preferred before the Appellate Tribunal under the Customs Act being Appeal No.676 of 2004, which is pending for adjudication. Though copy of memo. of such appeal has not been annexed with this petition but on our query learned counsel has candidly conceded that all grounds urged in this petition have been taken by the petitioner in his appeal which is pending before the Appellate Tribunal. This being the position that not only adequate alternate remedy is available to the petitioner against the two orders impugned in this petition but such remedy has already been availed by him, we do not find any valid justification to entertain this petition at this stage. Same is accordingly dismissed in limine with the observations that the Appellate Tribunal shall hear and dispose of the pending Appeal No.676 of 2004 of the petitioner within two months from the date of communication of this order. Foregoing are the reasons of our short order whereby this petition was dismissed in limine today along with listed applications. M.B.A./A-185/K Petition dismissed.