Appeal to the Supreme Court
Appeal to the Supreme Court legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Section 10(1) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 provided that it applied to a winding up order as well as any order or decision made in the winding up proceedings after a company had been ordered to be wound up
Resultantly, a winding up order as well as any order passed or decision made by the Company Judge after the winding up of a company should be appealable before the Supreme Court instead of the Division Bench of the High Court. [Ibrahim Shamsi v. Bashir Ahmed Memon (2005 SCMR 1450) held to be good law; Kamaluddin Qureshi v. Ali International Company (PLD 2009 SC 367) overturned].
Section 10(1) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 provided that it applied to a winding up order as well as any order or decision made in the winding up proceedings after a company had been ordered to be wound up
Resultantly, a winding up order as well as any order passed or decision made by the Company Judge after the winding up of a company should be appealable before the Supreme Court instead of the Division Bench of the High Court. [Ibrahim Shamsi v. Bashir Ahmed Memon (2005 SCMR 1450) held to be good law; Kamaluddin Qureshi v. Ali International Company (PLD 2009 SC 367) overturned].
Adjudication in appeal proceedings by the Supreme Court at the apex level was distinct and different from decision/findings of Domestic Tribunals, not because of hierarchy but because of the statutory powers available to an appellate court under S.67 of the Representation of the People Act, 1976
Adjudication of an issue, which was a continuous bone of contention between the parties could not be postponed even if there was a lapse of a period of 10 years ; and particularly when a candidate had to prove his/her credentials in terms of Arts. 62 & 63 of the Constitution to establish that no objection/attack was actionable against him or her, both before as well as after entering the Parliament or the Provincial Assembly
Court could intervene in the election of such candidates, who were found to be disqualified, even after having been elected as members of Parliament, and their election could subsequently be de-notified.
"Appeal to the Supreme Court", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124944288
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Appeal to the Supreme Court"
P L D 1958 Supreme Court (Pak
THE PROVINCIAL LIBRARY‑ — Appellant Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, EAST PAKISTAN‑ — Respondent
Court: (a) Income‑tax Act (XI of 1922), S. 66‑A (2)‑Appeal to Supreme Court--‑Competence‑Question to be decided solely on terms of S. 66‑A (2)--‑Civil Procedure Code (11 of 1908), Ss. 109 & 110‑Letters Patent (Dacca), Cl. 39‑Feroze Shah v. Income‑Tax Commissioner Punjab cd N.‑W. F, P. A I R 1931 Lah. 138 wrongly decided.P L D 1961 Dacca 490
PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN‑Petitioner Versus MOHIUDDIN MOLLA AND OTHERS‑Opposite‑Parties
Court: High Court1963 P T D 867
HARJINA & Co. (PAK.) LTD., KARACHI Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) KARACHI
Court: Karachi Pakistan1999 P T D 2114
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus Late S.M. SYED MUHAMMAD and others
Court: 226 I T R 824P L D 1960 Dacca 750
Haji BADI AHMED‑Petitioner Versus UNITED BANK OF INDIA LTD. AND OTHERS‑ — Opposite‑Parties
Court:2002 P T D 430
Messrs PRIME DAIRIES ICE CREAM LTD., LAHORE Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COMPANIES ZONE
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan1993 P T D 104
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus KERALA STATE DRUGS & PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. (N0.2)
Court: Kerala High Court (India)P L D 2014 Lahore 574
TALIB HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
Court: High Court2002 S C M R 540
Messrs PRIME DAIRIES ICE CREAM LTD., LAHORE‑‑‑Appellant Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, COMPANIES ZONE‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan2001 P T D 2421
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX and others Versus RANCHI CLUB LTD
Court: 247 I T R 209