2006 PLP 920 (SCMR)

Laws Cited

Representation

• ----Art. 185(3)---Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.IV, Rr.6, 15 & O.XXVI, R.6---Petition for leave to appeal---Disposal of petition on basis of compromise entered into by previous counsel of respondent---Review application by respondent through other counsel on the ground that his previous counsel was not authorized to enter into compromise---Maintainability---Supreme Court refused to give permission to Other counsel to appear for respondent as allegation levelled against previous counsel at his back were such, which might have far-reaching effects on his career---Supreme Court issued show-cause notice to Advocate-on-Record of respondent for violating O.IV, Rr.6, 15 & O.XXVI, R.6 of Supreme Court Rules, 1980 and for not producing previous counsel who appeared at petition stage---Review application was dismissed in circumstances.
• Zahid Hussain Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Mian Muhammad Nawaz, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
• Muhammad Ozair Chughtai, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
• Date of hearing: 15th July, 2004.
• Mr. Zahid Hussain Khan, learned Advocate Supreme Court has appeared on behalf of the petitioners, whereas at the petition stage, Malik Noor Muhammad Awan, learned Advocate Supreme Court had appeared on their behalf. Mr. Zahid Hussain Khan, Advocate Supreme Court referred to C.M.A. No.1041-L of 1999 and submitted that the petitioners who were respondents in Civil Petition No.267-L of 1999 never authorised Malik Noor Muhammad Awan, their Advocate to enter into compromise with the other party on the basis whereof petition was disposed of, as such, they have lost confidence in him.
• 2. Under Rule 6 of Order XXVI of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 no application for review could be entertained unless it is drawn by the Advocate who appeared at the hearing of the case in which the judgment or order sought to be reviewed is made except with the special leave of the Court nor shall any other Advocate be heard in support of such application for review unless the Court has dispensed with the aforesaid requirement. Under Rule 6 of Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 no Advocate other than an Advocate-on-Record shall appear or plead in any matter unless he is instructed by an Advocate-on-Record and under Rule 15 of Order IV of the Rules (ibid) no Advocate other than Advocate-on-Record shall be entitled to act for a party in any proceedings in the Court. In this case both the Rules 6 and 15 of Order IV of the Rules were violated by the Advocate-on-Record whereas under Rule 6 of Order XXVI of the Rules, Mr. Zahid Hussain Khan, Advocate Supreme Court could not appear except with the special leave of the Court.
• 3. Mr. Muhammad Ozair Chughtai, Advocate-on-Record for the petitioners be issued a show-cause notice under Supreme Court Rules, 1980 as to why his licence should not be suspended for violating the aforesaid Rules and not producing the counsel who appeared at the petition stage.
• 4. In view of the above, we are not inclined to give permission to Mr. Zahid Hussain Khan, Advocate Supreme Court to appear for the petitioners as the allegations levelled against he previous Advocate at his .back arc such which may have far-reaching effects on his career, therefore, this review petition along with the listed application is dismissed.

Headnotes / Summary

Judgment & Decree