2008 PLP 335 (SCMR)
ABDUL MAJID and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 335 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Rana Bhagwandas and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL MAJID and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 335 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 335 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Rana Bhagwandas and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 335 (SCMR) (ABDUL MAJID and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Irshad Ullah Chattha, Advocate Supreme Court and Walayat Umer, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 25th August, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 18-4-2002 passed in Civil Revision No.1556 of 1996).
Ss. 6 & 13
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Petitioner had contended that suit for pre-emption filed by respondent neither being maintainable under law nor being within time, plaint was liable to rejection which 'aspect was not taken into consideration by High Court while allowing civil revision
Since High Court had remanded suit to Trial Court to decide same in accordance with law, it would be proper that such questions touching the merits of claim, should be urged before Court of ultimate jurisdiction which would duly consider and determine same on merits, strictly in accordance with law. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.
In this petition, against the Lahore High Court judgment, dated 18-4-2002, learned counsel vehemently contended that the suit for pre-emption filed by the respondent was neither maintainable under the law nor within time and thus, the plaint was liable to rejection which aspect was not taken into consideration by the High Court while allowing civil revision application filed by the respondent. Since High Court has remanded the suit to the trial Court to decide the same in accordance with law, it would be proper that these questions, touching the merits of the claim and root of the case, are urged before the Court of ultimate jurisdiction. Learned counsel would like to agitate these questionings before the trial Court which shall be duly considered and determined on merits, strictly in accordance with law. With these observations, this petition is disposed of. H.B.T./A-163/SC Order accordingly.