1986 PLP 333 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD IQBAL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus ABDUL HAMID‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP 333 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IQBAL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus ABDUL HAMID‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 333 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 333 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 333 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD IQBAL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus ABDUL HAMID‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shahid Hussain Qadri, Advocate Supreme Court and Maqbool A. Kadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Amir Alam, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood Akhtar Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 27th October 1985.
- 2. We have heard the petitioners' counsel and the Advocate‑on‑Record for the respondent. We feel that this is a fit case for grant of leave to consider the effect of deliberately fixing a nominal court‑fee by the plaintiff/respondent and to consider whether, in the circumstances of this case, he should have been allowed to make up the deficiency.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Court Fees Act (VII of 1870), Ss.7 & 28‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider effect of deliberately fixing a nominal court‑fee by plaintiff‑respondent and to consider whether in circumstances of case he should have been allowed to make up deficiency.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑Muhammad Iqbal etc. vendees have filed the present petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of their R.F.A. in a pre‑emption case filed by Abdul Mood respondent.
2. We have heard the petitioners' counsel and the Advocate‑on‑Record for the respondent. We feel that this is a fit case for grant of leave to consider the effect of deliberately fixing a nominal court‑fee by the plaintiff/respondent and to consider whether, in the circumstances of this case, he should have been allowed to make up the deficiency. Security in the sum of Rs.,2,
000. To be heard on the same record with permission to file additional documents. M. Y. H. Leave granted.