1994SCMR 1711 (PLP)
KHAN MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Sh. MUHAMMAD AKRAM‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1994SCMR 1711 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | KHAN MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Sh. MUHAMMAD AKRAM‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994SCMR 1711 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994SCMR 1711 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994SCMR 1711 (PLP) (KHAN MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Sh. MUHAMMAD AKRAM‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Muzammal Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 31st October, 1993.
- SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑--This petition for review of the judgment of this Court in Civil Appeal No. 1051 of 1990 is barred by 29 days. It has been drawn up by Ch. Muzammal Khan, Advocate. He was not the counsel who appeared for the petitioner at the time of the hearing of the appeal. Today also only Ch. Muzammal Khan, Advocate, is present on behalf of the petitioner. A Thus, this petition violates Rule 6, Order XXVI, Pakistan Supreme Court Rules. There is an application on behalf of the petitioner for waiving of the requirement of the said Rule. However, no satisfactory justification has been made out in support of the request. The petition is accordingly dismissed.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment/order of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 8‑11‑1987 in C.R. No. 1326‑D of 1984). Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Art. 188‑‑‑Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XXVI, R. 6‑‑‑Review of Supreme Court judgment‑‑‑Review application was barred by 29 days and was not drafted and presented by the counsel who had appeared for the petitioner at the time of the hearing of appeal‑‑‑Petitioner's said counsel had not even appeared to argue or to be present at time of arguments‑‑‑Review application, thus, violated R. 6 of OXXVI, Supreme Court Rules, 1980‑‑‑No satisfactory justification was shown in support of request made in application on behalf of petitioner for waiving of requirement of R. 6 of OXXVI, Supreme Court Rules, 1980‑‑‑Review application was dismissed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑--This petition for review of the judgment of this Court in Civil Appeal No. 1051 of 1990 is barred by 29 days. It has been drawn up by Ch. Muzammal Khan, Advocate. He was not the counsel who appeared for the petitioner at the time of the hearing of the appeal. Today also only Ch. Muzammal Khan, Advocate, is present on behalf of the petitioner. A Thus, this petition violates Rule 6, Order XXVI, Pakistan Supreme Court Rules. There is an application on behalf of the petitioner for waiving of the requirement of the said Rule. However, no satisfactory justification has been made out in support of the request. The petition is accordingly dismissed. A.A./K‑236/S Review dismissed.