Discretionary remedy
Discretionary remedy legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Exercise of jurisdiction under Art. 199 of the Constitution is discretionary.
Remedy by way of specific performance was equitable and it was not obligatory on the court to grant such a relief merely because it was lawful to do so.
"Discretionary remedy", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124954139
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Discretionary remedy"
1997 P L C 459
MUHAMMAD AYUB Versus ZULFIQAR INDUSTRIES LTD., KARACHI and 3 others
Court: Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh1986 S C M R 1090
SHER BROTHERS TRANSPORT Co. Ltd., LYALLPUR — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/ COLLECTOR, LYALLPUR and others — Respondents
Court: ---Arts. 185(3) & 199--Belated writ petition--Delay (of five years) fatal to discretionary remedy of writ petition--Plea that petitioner was prosecuting remedies by way of mercy petitions, repelled--Filing of mercy petitions, held, no ground to justify delay--Leave to appeal refused.--Delay.1982 S C M R 560
RAZA KHAN-Petitioner Versus VICE-CHANCELLOR, N.W. F. P. UNIVERSITY OE ENGINEERING &
Court: Art. 199-Writ jurisdiction-Petitioners guilty of deliberate suppres sion of material facts-Discretionary remedy, held, cannot be availed of by such persons---Writ.1981 C L C 1574
QADIR BUX‑Petitioner Versus BOARD OF REVENUE, WEST PAKISTAN, LAHORE
Court: KarachiP L D 1963 Dacca 736
AND OTHERS‑ — Petitioners Versus PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN AND OTHERS
Court:1988 P Cr
ABDUL REHMAN and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
Court: Karachi1987 M L D 142
NAZIR AHMAD and 6 others — Petitioners Versus RAHIM BAKHSH and 10 others — Respondents
Court: Lahore1992 M L D 1959
SARFRAZ KHAN=‑Petitioner Versus ALLAH DAD and 2 others‑‑Respondents
Court: QuettaP L D 1995 Karachi 409
KHURSHID ALAM and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus UNITED BANK LIMITED and 7 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑‑S. 9‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Alternate adequate remedy provided by law‑‑‑Non‑availing of‑‑‑Effect‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑ Competency‑‑‑Constitutional petition was not substitute of appeal or revision and being discretionary remedy could only be granted when circumstances sG warranted‑‑‑Where any condition precedent for preferring appeal had been imposed and same was not against established judicial norms, such embargo could not be deemed to be against law‑‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction 'of High Court could not be invoked when another adequate remedy was provided by law‑‑‑Banking Tribunal's decision/decree was appealable with a condition precedent of depositing decretal amount‑‑‑Petitioner did not file appeal and thus, avoided deposit of decretal amount by filing Constitutional petition‑‑ Constitutional jurisdiction could not be invoked simply to frustrate any provision of law, providing adequate remedy‑‑‑Constitutional petition was thus, not maintainable in circumstances. p. 413 A1987 C L C 1873
MUHAMMAD HANIF‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE, Punjab and 10 others‑‑Respondents
Court: Lahore