Home Maxims & Terms Negligence and carelessness meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Negligence and carelessness

Negligence and carelessness legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2013 MLD 743 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent
Negligence and carelessnessCause of actionDuty to take care

For the purpose of negligence and carelessness and the duty to take care, the essentials were that negligence in the sense of mere carelessness, would not give rise to any cause of action

Carelessness, however, would assume legal quality of negligence where there was duty to take care and where failure in that duty had caused damages

Duty to take care was, thus, an essential ingredient of the "tort of negligence" and unless such duty was established, no case of actionable negligence could arise.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Negligence and carelessness", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124940122

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Negligence and carelessness"

SCMR 1993
Civil Appeal No.1150 of 1990, decided on 16th November, 1992.

1993 S C M R 256

GHULAM MUSTAFA SHAH‑‑‑Appellant Versus HAJI through Legal Heirs and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD 1983
Civil Petition No. 93-R of 1983, decided on 22nd May, 1983.

P L D 1983 Supreme Court 385

Mirza MUHAMMAD SAEED-Petitioner Versus SHAHAB-UD-DIN AND 8 oTH$its-Respondents

Court: Ss. 5 & 14-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 151-Condonation of delay-Courts can show indulgence and condone delay where time has been lost by prosecuting remedy before wrong forum on account of bona fide mistake or error of counsel which reasonable and prudent man despite exercising due diligence and caution might have committed - Mistake in approaching wrong forum due to gross negligence and carelessness of counsel where not appearing that counsel has shown due diligence and caution before moving wrong forum-Held, only remedy for client of such counsel to sue him for damages for loss suffered on account of his negligence-Exercise of such remedy more frequently and counsel made to pay for their carelessness and negligence may ameliorate situation.-Counsel and client.
PCRLJ 1986
Bail Application No. 1097 of 1985, decided on 12th September, 1985.

1986 P Cr

MUHAMMAD YOUSUF BALOCH Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Court: Karachi
SCMR 1988
Civil Petition No.102 of 1982, decided on 17th July, 1988.

1988 S C M R 1968

MUHAMMAD IQBAL HAIDRI — Petitioner Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, JHANG and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLC(CS) 1991
Service Appeal No. 413, decided on 2nd June, 1990.

1991 P L C (C

MUSHTAQ AHMAD Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT and another

Court: Service Tribunal Azad J&K
CLC 2003
N/A

2003 C L C 885

SABRAN BIBI and 7 others — Appellants Versus WAPDA through Chairman, WAPDA House — Respondent

Court: Lahore
PLC(CS) 1989
Appeal No. KAR-399 of 1980, decided on 23rd January, 1989.

1989 P L C 866

KARACHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Versus TAJ BAREEN

Court: Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind
MLD 1984
First Rent Appeal No.228 of 1982, decided on 23rd December, 1984.

1984 M L D 1030

S. MUNAWAR ALI — Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD MUSTAFA — Respondent

Court: Karachi
MLD 2013
2013-January-1

2013 M L D 743

Mrs. ALAM ARA — Appellant Versus Dr. SHAISTA TARIQ — Respondent

Court: Peshawar
MLD 2007
2007-April-19

2007 M L D 1653

Ltd. Col (Retd.) M. AKRAM ABBASI and another — Appellants Versus PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS — Respondents

Court: Karachi