SCMR 2008

2008 PLP 55 (SCMR)

NATIONAL LOGISTIC CELL — Petitioner Versus RUKHSANA PARVEEN NAZEER and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
C.P.L.A. No.629-K of 2004, decided on 3rd January, 2006.
Honorable Judges
Rana Bhagwandas and Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2008 PLP 55 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Rana Bhagwandas and Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, JJ
Parties NATIONAL LOGISTIC CELL — Petitioner Versus RUKHSANA PARVEEN NAZEER and another — Respondents
Primary Law Fatal Accidents Act (XIII of 1855)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 55 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Fatal Accidents Act (XIII of 1855) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 55 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Rana Bhagwandas and Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 55 (SCMR) (NATIONAL LOGISTIC CELL — Petitioner Versus RUKHSANA PARVEEN NAZEER and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Fatal Accidents Act (XIII of 1855)

Representation

  • Irtaza H. Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court and Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
  • Nemo for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment of Sindh High Court, Karachi, dated 4-6-2004 passed in H.C.A. No.149 of 1993).

S. 1

Constitution of, Pakistan (1973), Art.185(2)(d)(e) & (3)

Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XII, R.2

Petition for' leave to appeal

Conversion of petition into appeal

Fatal accident

Determination of amount of compensation

High Court on reappraisal of evidence and re-evaluation of record, enhanced amount of compensation

Validity

Direct appeal as of right in terms of Art.185(2)(d)(e) of the Constitution was competent before Supreme Court, but instead petition for leave to appeal had been filed

Under O.XII, R.2 of Supreme Court Rules, 1980, memo. of appeal was required to be filed within 30 days from the date of grant of certificate by the High Court or from the date of impugned judgment, decree or final order of the High Court

Petition could not be converted into an appeal as in that event, it would be barred by 29 days

Petition was dismissed as incompetent and not maintainable at law.

Judgment & Decree

RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.

This petition is directed against Division Bench judgment of Sindh High Court dated 4-6-2004 substantially modifying the judgment and decree passed by a learned Single Judge in a suit awarding compensation under the provisions of Fatal Accidents Act, 1855.

2. While learned Single Judge at the conclusion of the trial had awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.2,08,000, in High Court appeal by the respondent widow of deceased Division Bench on reappraisal of evidence and re-evaluation of record enhanced the compensation to Rs.8,00,000 vide judgment, dated 4-6-2004.

3. In terms of Article 185(2)(d) and (e) of the Constitution a direct appeal as of right would be competent before this Court but instead of C.P.L.A. has been filed on 2-8-2004. Under Order XII, rule 2 of the Pakistan Supreme Court Rules, 1980 memo. of appeal is required to be filed within 30 days from the date of grant of certificate by the High Court or from the date of impugned judgment, decree or final order of the High Court. We have considered the question of converting this petition into appeal. Evidently present petition cannot be converted into an appeal as in that event it would be barred by 29 days. Indeed no effort was made for conversion of petition into appeal and no endeavour was made to account of inordinate delay in the memo. of petition.

4. In the circumstances, the petition is dismissed as incompetent and not maintainable at law. H.B.T./N-7/SC Petition dismissed.