1983SCMR 1017 (PLP)
FAZAL DIN alias MUHAMMAD FAZIL AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus MAZHAR IQBAL AND OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1983SCMR 1017 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | -----Art. 185 (3)--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XII, r: 33- Abatement-Leave to appeal granted to consider (i) whether in presets- ' of co-appellant, appeal could have abated qua his two brothers and if so whether delay in applying for setting aside abatement could not be condoned on ground that legal representative were misled by possible saving of abatement; (ii) whether petitioner could not represent estate of his deceased brothers by representing their joint interest and what was effect of O. XLI, r. 33, C. P. C. and (X) whether case of so called total abatement.--Abatement. |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ |
| Parties | FAZAL DIN alias MUHAMMAD FAZIL AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus MAZHAR IQBAL AND OTHERS-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983SCMR 1017 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983SCMR 1017 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the -----Art. 185 (3)--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XII, r: 33- Abatement-Leave to appeal granted to consider (i) whether in presets- ' of co-appellant, appeal could have abated qua his two brothers and if so whether delay in applying for setting aside abatement could not be condoned on ground that legal representative were misled by possible saving of abatement; (ii) whether petitioner could not represent estate of his deceased brothers by representing their joint interest and what was effect of O. XLI, r. 33, C. P. C. and (X) whether case of so called total abatement.--Abatement. bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983SCMR 1017 (PLP) (FAZAL DIN alias MUHAMMAD FAZIL AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus MAZHAR IQBAL AND OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Munir Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court with Syed Wahid Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Sh. Masud Aktar Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Syed Munir Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court with Syed Wahid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Sh. Masud Aktar Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court. Dated 20-1-1980 in R. S. A. 623/65).
Art. 185 (3)--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XII, r: 33- Abatement-Leave to appeal granted to consider (i) whether in presets- ' of co-appellant, appeal could have abated qua his two brothers and if so whether delay in applying for setting aside abatement could not be condoned on ground that legal representative were misled by possible saving of abatement; (ii) whether petitioner could not represent estate of his deceased brothers by representing their joint interest and what was effect of O. XLI, r. 33, C. P. C. and (X) whether case of so called total abatement.--[Abatement]. Shah Muhammad and others v. Muhammad Bakhsh P -L D 1972 SC 321 and Wali and others v. Manak Ali and others P L D 19650 S C 651 ref.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑After bearing the learned counsel in this petition for leave to appeal, we consider it a fit case for grant of leave, inter aria on the following grounds :‑ (a) whether in the presence of Fazal Din a co‑appellant, the appeal could have abated quo his two brothers Umer Hayat and Muhammad Alam; (b) If so, whether the delay in applying for setting aside this abatement could not be condoned on the ground that the legal representatives were misled by possible saving of the abatement on ground mentioned in para. (a) above. (c) whether Fazal Din could not represent the estate of his deceased brothers by representing their joint interest and what is the effect o Order XLI, rule 33, C.P.C, and the rule laid down in Shah Muhammad and others v. Muhammad Bakhsh P L D 1972 S C 321, in this behalf ; (d) whether it was a case of so‑called total abatement of the appeal in the High Court notwithstanding the principle laid down in Wall and others v. Manak Ali and others P L D 1965 S C
651. Order accordingly. Security Rs. 2,
000. Order for maintenance of status quo to continue. Appeal to be prepared on present record with liberty to add other ne cessary documents. M.A.K. Leave granted.