Home Maxims & Terms Prospective and not retrospective meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Prospective and not retrospective

Prospective and not retrospective legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2017 YLRN 261 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Art. 189Decisions of Supreme Court binding on other courtsBinding nature of decisionProspective and not retrospective

Contention of petitioner was that principles laid down by Supreme Court were not applicable because it would have prospective effect and not retrospective effect and that judgment was delivered by Supreme Court in the year 2015 but present case was decreed by Trial Court on 2006, therefore, petitioners could not be non-suited

Validity

Such contention had no substance.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Prospective and not retrospective", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124963709

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Prospective and not retrospective"

PTD 2018
Writ Petition No.67 of 2016, decided on 26th December, 2017.

2018 P T D 977

Messrs BESTWAY CEMENT LIMITED through Senior Deputy Financial Controller Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ISLAMABAD and 3 others

Court: Islamabad High Court
PLC(CS) 2002
Appeal No.506(R)/CS of 2000, decided on 18th November, 2000.

2002 P L C (C

MUHAMMAD HASNAIN Versus THE DIVISOINAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS,

Court: Federal Service Tribunal
PLC(CS) 2024
C.P. No.1537 of 2022, decided on 27th March, 2023.

2024 P L C (C

Mst. MALALA BIBI Versus INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BALOCHISTAN, QUETTA and another

Court: Balochistan High Court
PLD 1971
S. A. O. No. 22 of 1969, decided on 22nd July 1970.

P L D 1971 Quetta 1

ABDUL MANAN‑Respondent‑-Appellant Versus Haji KARAM ELLAHI AND ANOTHER‑-Applicants — Respondents

Court: S. 13(2)(vi) as amended by West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction (Amendment) Ordinance (XXI of 1965), S. 5‑Provi sions of amending Ordinance conferring benefits on tenants and imposing restrictions on landlord's right of ejectment‑ Change of substantive law and not of procedure‑Hence prospective and not retrospective and, therefore, not applicable to pending cases‑Syed Shin Gul v. Haji Abdul Majid P L D 1968 Quetta 45 dissented from.
CLC 2006
2005-October-4

2006 C L C 15

DILAWAR SHAH ROGHANI — Petitioner Versus NORTH-WEST FRONTIER PROVINCE through Secretary, Works and Services Department, Government of N.-W.F.P., Peshawar and 2 others — Respondents

Court: Peshawar
PLD 1956
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 64 of 1956, decided on 19th April 1956.

P L D 1956 Supreme Court (Pak

MUHAMMAD ISHAQ‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Court:
CLC 1998
Constitutional Petition No.226'of 1988, heard on 11th November, 1997

1998 C L C 1394

RASHID IFTIKHAR and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus KARACHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Karachi
CLD 2005
R.F.A. No.530 of 2003, decided on 29th April, 2004.

2005 C L D 380

IJAZ AHMED and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus ZARI TARAQIATI BANK OF PAKISTAN through Manager‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Lahore
PLC(CS) 1983
Appeal No. SUK‑517 of 1981, decided on 7th April, 1982.

1983 P L C 704

QURBAN ALI CHANNA Versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN

Court: Labour Appellate Tribunal Sind
PTD 1990
Constitutional Petition No. D‑1135 of 1988, decided on 19th October, 1989.

1990 P T D 29

CRESCENT PAK. INDUSTRIES (Pvt.) LIMITED Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others

Court: Karachi High Court