Home Maxims & Terms Presumptions meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Presumptions

Presumptions legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2022 PLD 273 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent
Courts, duty ofPresumptionsCourt is to discover legislative intent and interpret laws promulgated by Legislature

While interpreting a statute or discovering legislative intent, it is presumed by Court that mistake or absurdity cannot be attributed to Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)

No legislation can be interpreted in such a manner which has effect of defeating public interest or protecting personal interests of a few in disregard or derogation of interests of public at large.

2021 PCrLJ 1485 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S. 14Corruption and corrupt practicesOnus to proveShifting of onusPresumptionsScope

National Accountability Bureau (NAB) is not absolved of its responsibility to prove case against accused as presumption of innocence always lies in favour of accused person

Onus shifts only after initial discharge of burden by prosecution.

2021 YLRN 46 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Art. 129PresumptionsExistence of certain factsPrinciple

Courts are allowed under Art.129 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, to presume existence of any fact, which it thinks likely to have happened with regard to common course of natural events and human conduct in relation to the facts of particular case.

2015 PLD 20 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
S. 498

Pre-arrest bail-Presumptions-Concept of pre-arrest bail was based on three presumptions, firstly that the accused was presumed to be innocent until he was found guilty; secondly, that the accused should have a right to prepare his defence and prove his innocence before the Trial Court, and thirdly that accused should not be punished before the finding of conviction rendered by the court.

2015 CLC 844 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
S.118Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXVII, R.2Negotiable instrumentPresumptionsFiling of ordinary recovery suitEffectPlaintiff filed ordinary suit for recovery of amount on the basis of bank cheques issued by defendants in his favourValidity

Filing of ordinary suit based on negotiable instrument in no manner deprived plaintiff of the benefits of statutory presumptions attached to negotiable instrument under S.118 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

All cheques and pay orders i.e. loan amount, were debited/shown in statements of accounts

Loan amount was not only acknowledged by issuing five cheques but also acknowledged the same in writing on stamp papers, which were not only signed and executed by defendants but also attested by Notary Public and Justice of Peace

Averments made in plaint, affidavit-in-ex-parte proof and documents produced by plaintiff in his deposition had gone un-rebutted/un-challenged and plaintiff had fully succeeded to establish his claim against defendants

Suit was decreed in circumstances.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Presumptions", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124952856

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Presumptions"

CLC 2022
2021-November-23

2022 C L C 947

EJAZ IQBAL — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore (Multan Bench)
YLR 1999
Civil Revision No.761 of 1999, decided on 27th May, 1999.

1999 Y L R 2016

SULTAN MUBARIZ through his Legal Heirs‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GUL MUHAMMAD and another‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 1991
N/A

P L D 1991 Lahore 415

DOST MUHAMMAD alias DOOSO — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: High Court
CLC 1982
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 25 of 1981, decided on 26th June, 1982. .

1982 C L C 1712

ALI MUHAMMAD AND 2 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus HUKAM DAD AND 9 OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: SC(A J & K)
PLD 1967
Appeal from Appellate Decrees Nos. 467 to 471 of 1953, decided on 14th June 1965.

P L D 1967 Dacca 199

JALAL AHMAD CHOWDHURY‑Appellant Versus AZIZUR RAHMAN AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Court:
CLC 1980
1979-July-29

1980 CLC216

MUHAMMAD SARWAR AND 4 OTHERS-Appellants Versus EAZAL DIN — Respondent

Court: SC(AJ&K)
PLD 1972
Civil Appeal No. 57 of 1970, decided on 18th September 1971:

P L D 1972 Azad J & K 26

GUL ZAMAN‑Appellant Versus SHER ZAMAN AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: Ss. 107 & 108‑--Burden of proving death of person‑Presumption of life‑--Intent and object of Ss. 107 & 108‑--Fixation of seven years, a compromise between dictates of reality and Roman concept embodied in maxim: De morte hominis nulla est cunctatio longa (no delay is long concerning the death of a man)‑--Presumption of death under Hindu Law‑Presumption of life under Muhammadan Law‑--Court can make an inference of death even before seven years if evidence warrants such a finding--‑Date of death in such cases is impossible to prove--‑Law does not require any person to do an impossible thing‑Maxims: Impossibilium nulla obligatio est (there is no obligation to do impossible things) Impotentia excusat legem (inability is an excuse in law) Judge to do utmost to find a way out of difficulties obstructing him from doing justice‑I L R 33 Cal. 173; A I R 1920 Lah. 191; A I R 1944 Pesh. 29 and P L D 1957 Pesh. 1 dissented from.
CLC 2026
N/A

2026 C L C 30

SHAUKAT ALI — Appellant Versus ABDUL GHAFFAR — Respondent

Court: Lahore (Multan Bench)
PLD 1962
Criminal Reference No. 97 of 1960, decided on 22nd February 1961.

P L D 1962 (W

THE STATE Versus ALI MUHAMMAD AND OTHERS

Court:
PTD 2003
C.T.R. No. 11 of 2002, decided on 19th December, 2002.

2003 P T D 1516

Messrs HUSSAIN FOOD CORPORATION, MULTAN Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MULTAN ZONE, MULTAN

Court: Lahore High Court