Recurring cause of action

2025 PLC(CS) 1204 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 11, 13, 17, 18 & 19Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199Federal Government Benevolent Fund and Group Insurance Rules, 1972, R.12Group insurance and benevolent fund, payment ofWidow, right ofEntitlementLaches, applicability ofExceptionRecurring cause of action

Petitioner (widow of deceased employee) instituted the present Constitutional petition seeking release of benevolent grant, group insurance and pensionary benefits arising from the services of her deceased husband, who joined the respondent company in 1982 and retired in 2008 under the Voluntary Surrender of Service (VSS) Scheme, in pursuance of which he was paid under the VSS agreement, but monthly pension was denied on the ground that he fell short of the 20 years qualifying service requirement

He had served 19 years and 7 months in regular service

Respondent company later introduced a 'separation bonus scheme' for employees falling short of 20 years, which was credited to his account

After death of petitioner's husband in 2015, petitioner (widow) filed the present petition upon rejection of pensionary claims by respondent company by asserting that the shortfall of months should have been condoned and that she was entitled to benevolent grant and group insurance

Held: Case of the petitioner (widow) fell in the same category of case which had been decided by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.2506 of 2016 whereby the Supreme Court held that the appellants had no valid grievance as they had voluntarily opted for the VSS (Voluntary Separation Scheme), accepted the separation bonus (which was only available to those with less than 20 years of qualifying service), and signed the waiver forms; they did not disclose the said facts in their petitions, which amounted to a non-disclosure of material facts; that if the appellants truly believed they had completed 20 years of service and were entitled to pension, they should not have accepted the separation bonus or should have refunded it before pursuing pension claims; that their conduct barred them from seeking pension under the doctrine of estoppel

Whereas, provisions of the Federal Employees Benevolent Fund and Group Insurance Act, 1969 (the "Act 1969") entitled the petitioner to receive benevolent grant for her life for a period starting from date of death of her husband as he died after retirement but before attaining the age of seventy years

Petitioner was also entitled to receive sum assured on account of premium contributed towards group insurance in terms of Ss. 13 & 19 of the Act, 1969

With respect to the objection regarding applicability of laches in the present petition allegedly being filed after 12 years of VSS agreement, same was without force for the reason that doctrine of laches could not applied in every case as a hard and fast rule without examining dictates of justice, equity and fair play

In the present case, respondent Nos.1 to 3 were required to act fairly and justly to discharge their duties by forwarding the application of petitioner for payment of benevolent grant and group insurance if found entitled and inaction on the part of respondents to act upon application filed by the petitioner created a recurring cause of action in her favour for which no limitation applied

In the present case there was a recurring cause of action for the petitioner to knock at the doors of justice and petitioner could not be dismissed on account of mere delay

Petitioner being widow of deceased employee was entitled to receive benevolent grant for life, she was also entitled for grant of group insurance for the sum assured against the life of her deceased husband

Petitioner failed to make out a case for grant of monthly pension

Constitutional petition was partly allowed, in circumstances.

2024 CLC 106 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Inheritance, right ofLimitationRevenue entries, rectification / correction ofRecurring cause of actionScope

Plaintiff claimed his share being real son and sole legal heir of his late mother out of her(mother's) share from the estate of her brother (deceased) by specifically challenging relevant mutations and Shajrah-e-Nasb

Suit for declaration filed by the petitioner/plaintiff was concurrently dismissed

Validity

Record revealed that the petitioner/plaintiff , in his evidence, had duly exhibited a document(which was the succession certificate for receipt of due debts of another late brother of petitioner's mother) and the name of petitioner/plaintiff was reflecting in said document (certificate)

Jamabandi for the relevant year regarding land / estate left by petitioner's late mother also showed his name as owner of said land / estate (left by his late mother)

Petitioner could not have been deprived of his lawful share out of the share of his mother from the estate of her deceased brother

No one could be allowed to approbate reprobate, or otherwise blow hot and cold in one breath

In said circumstances, claim of petitioner/plaintiff was required to be determined by taking into consideration all relevant facts and documents brought on record rather than deciding the lis on technical grounds

Suit of the petitioner being a matter of inheritance was within time

No illegal act or wrong entry could be legitimized with efflux of time, howsoever long it might be

Mother of the petitioner/plaintiff was real sister of her deceased brother and petitioner /plaintiff being real son and sole legal heir of said lady had claimed his share in said capacity in the inheritance left by his maternal uncle

No limitation would run in the matter of inheritance having recurring cause of action

Party having its right in the inherited property could claim the same at any time

Any transaction found to be result of misrepresentation could not be protected on the sole score of limitation as the same did not apply in the case of inheritance as barrier of limitation was no more a hurdle in the enforcement of rights of inheritance unless a party was shown to be guilty of gross negligence and abandonment of his / her rights

Entries in the revenue record had afforded fresh cause of action to the plaintiff and adverse entries if allowed to remain unchallenged did not extinguish right of a party against whom such entry had been made

Courts below had not kept in view the above material aspects of the matter while dismissing the suit of the petitioner/plaintiff

High Court set aside the impugned judgments and decrees and consequently, the suit filed by the petitioner/plaintiff stood decreed

Revision was allowed, in circumstances.

2014 PLC(CS) 247 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Art. 199Constitutional petitionCivil serviceLachesPromotionRecurring cause of actionCivil servant aggrieved by his supersession filed appeal before Service TribunalAppeal pending before Service Tribunal was abated due to the death of civil servantConstitutional petition was filed by the wife of deceased civil servant after three years of the death of her husbandValidityLoss in pensionary benefits being caused to the petitioner was on yearly basis, it was thus recurring loss

Constitutional petition did not suffer from laches, in circumstances and was allowed.

2013 YLR 2738 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 20(2)MortgageLimitationRecurring cause of action

Receipt of rent or produce of the mortgaged land by the mortgagee, when it was in his possession, was deemed to be the acknowledgment of the payment of debt

Time period would be computed from the date of acknowledgment

When a mortgaged property was in possession of the mortgagee and he was receiving its rent or usufruct, the receipt of the produce on every harvest, was deemed to be an acknowledgment

Time would be reckoned from every harvest and the mortgagor would have recurring cause of action on each harvest, regardless of what the intention of the mortgagee may be or might have been.