1968 SCMR 107 (PLP)
Mian MOHAMMAD HAYAT-Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN-Respondent
| Citation | 1968 SCMR 107 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | S. A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ |
| Parties | Mian MOHAMMAD HAYAT-Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN-Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 SCMR 107 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 SCMR 107 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: S. A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 SCMR 107 (PLP) (Mian MOHAMMAD HAYAT-Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mian Muhammad Shafi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Nazar Khan, Senior Attorney for Petitioner.
- Raja Said Akbar, Advocate-General West Pakistan (M. A. Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by ljaz Ali, Attorney for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
(On review of the judgment and order of this Court dated the 10th October 1967, in Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 274 of 1967). Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 62-Review - Delay in presentation of petition for leave to appeal condoned by Court after hearing counsel of parties-Re-agitation of such question on review petition not permissible when no fresh ground justifying such course raised.
Judgment & Decree
S. A. RAHMAN, J.-In this case Mian Muhammad Shafi, on behalf of the petitioner Muhammad Hayat, wishes to contest the cor donation of delay made by this Court in respect of a petition for special leave to appeal, filed by the respondent, from an order of the High Court of West Pakistan. The learned counsel concedes that he was himself heard at the time when leave to appeal was granted and that after bearing both the parties, a Bench of this Court decided to condone the delay, if any, in the presentation of the petition for special leave to appeal, The learned counsel really wishes to reagitate the same question and' this is not permissible on a review petition, specially as no fresh ground appears justifying that course. The petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.