1987 PLP 2991 (MLD)
Malik AHMED NAWAZ and another — Petitioners Versus 1ST SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SOUTH), KARACHI and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1987 PLP 2991 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Muhammad Mazhar Ali, JJ |
| Parties | Malik AHMED NAWAZ and another — Petitioners Versus 1ST SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SOUTH), KARACHI and 3 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 2991 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 2991 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Muhammad Mazhar Ali, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 2991 (MLD) (Malik AHMED NAWAZ and another — Petitioners Versus 1ST SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SOUTH), KARACHI and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Munawwar Malik for Petitioners.
- Naseem Farooqui and Abdul Rahim Kazi, A.A.-G. for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 13th April, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
Art.199--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115--First revision dismissed as withdrawn--Competency to file second revision--Where first revision against interlocutory order was dismissed as withdrawn without permission to file fresh revision, second revision, held, could not be filed for impugning same order which was subject-matter of first revision petition--Second revision was rightly dismissed- Constitutional petition against dismissal of second revision being devoid of merit was dismissed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, J.--This petition is directed against an order dated 18-1-1987 passed in Civil Revision No.79/86 dismissing the present petitioner's petition, inter alia, on the ground that since his Revision Application No.79/86 was dismissed as withdrawn the second revision was not competent. It may be observed that the above aforesaid first revision was filed against the order dated 15-11-1986 whereby the learned Civil Judge had dismissed the petitioner's application under Order I, rule 10, C.P.C. and Order VII, rule 11, C P C which was filed in the suit No.1753/86 filed by the private respondent in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Karachi, (South).
2. In support of his above petition it has been urged by Mr. Munawar Malik that since the firs, revision was withdrawn and it was not dismissed on merits the second revision .was competent. In our view, since the first revision was against an interlocutory order and as the same was dismissed as withdrawn without the permission to file fresh revision, the second revision could hot have been filed A for impugning the same order, which was the subject-matter of the first revision petition and, therefore, no exception can be taken to the impugned order dismissing the second revision. The petition is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. H. B.T./A-213/K Petition dismissed.