P L D 1961 (W (PLP)
Messrs HASHAMALLY BROTHERS ‑Appellant Versus Messrs NETHERLANDS TRADING SOCIETY‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1961 (W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Limitation--‑Time should be reckoned from date of judgment and not from date of decree‑Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 12 (2) & Art. 156‑East and West Steamship Co. v. Queensland Insurance Co. P L D 190 Kar. 840 foil. |
| Bench Members | Wahiduddin Ahmed and Qadeeruddin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | Messrs HASHAMALLY BROTHERS ‑Appellant Versus Messrs NETHERLANDS TRADING SOCIETY‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1961 (W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1961 (W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Limitation--‑Time should be reckoned from date of judgment and not from date of decree‑Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 12 (2) & Art. 156‑East and West Steamship Co. v. Queensland Insurance Co. P L D 190 Kar. 840 foil. bench comprising: Wahiduddin Ahmed and Qadeeruddin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1961 (W (PLP) (Messrs HASHAMALLY BROTHERS ‑Appellant Versus Messrs NETHERLANDS TRADING SOCIETY‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Hafiz Sultan Ahmad for Appellant.
- Dorab Patel for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 3rd January 1951.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 5‑--Illness as ground for delay‑Medical certificate in support should be produced alongwith application or in any case before final hearing of appeal‑--No further time can be granted for producing such certificate. (b) Appeal--‑ Limitation--‑Time should be reckoned from date of judgment and not from date of decree‑Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 12 (2) & Art. 156‑[East and West Steamship Co. v. Queensland Insurance Co. P L D 190 Kar. 840 foil].
Judgment & Decree
Mr. Dorab Patel has raised a pre liminary objection that the appeal is time barred. The appellant has filed an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act. The ground for condoning the delay is that the appellant fell ill in the Ist week of August 1959 and was confined to bed till the appeal was filed. The application and the affidavit is not support ed by any medical certificate or other reliable evidence. Admittedly the appellant is alleged to have suffered from typhoid fever but except his bare allegation, there is nothing to prove it. The learned Counsel for the appellant wants time to produce medical certificate in support of the alleged illness. This appeal was dismissed for default on 19‑10‑1960 and was restored on 1‑12‑1960. The appellant ought to have produced the medical certificate along with the application and in any case should have produced it before the final hearing of the appeal particularly as the respondent opposed the application for condo nation of the delay. No further time can be granted for this purpose. In our opinion the appellant has failed to show that he, fell ill in August 1959 and remained in bed till 13‑10‑1959. He is therefore unable to show sufficient cause for condonation of delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act. Hafiz Sultan Ahmad has next urged that the time for appeal should be reckoned from the date of the decree. This contention was repelled in a Full Bench decision of this Court in East an West Steamship Co. v. Queensland Insurance Co. (P L D 1960 Kar. 840). We are bound by this decision and time cannot be reckoned from the date of the decree. Admittedly on the basis of the date of the judgment, which is to be taken as the date of the decree, the appeal should have been filed on the reopening of the High Court on the 8th of August 1959. The appeal was filed on 14‑ 0‑1959 and is clearly time barred. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. K. B. A. Appeal dismissed.