Promulgation of Statute
Promulgation of Statute legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
The formal proclamation or publication of a law to make it legally binding.
"Promulgation of Statute", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/12534
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Promulgation of Statute"
2004 P Cr
AFAF RAHIM — Petitioner Versus NISAR AHMAD and 2 others — Respondents
Court: Lahore2014 C L D 1157
NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN — Plaintiff Versus Messrs KHYBER TEXTILE MILLS LTD. and others — Defendants
Court: Peshawar2009 C L D 361
Messrs PETROSIN and 2 others — Plaintiffs Versus Messrs FAYSAL BANK — Defendant
Court: Lahore2015 C L C 945
Messrs RASHEED CNG STATION through Proprietor — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and 6 others — Respondents
Court: Lahore1990 M L D 1960
ABDUL BAQUI‑‑Petitioner Versus Malik MITHA KHAN and another‑‑Respondents
Court: QuettaP L D 1978 Supreme Court 290
SECRETARY, LABOUR DEPARTMENT, N: W. F. P. GOVERNMENT, PESHAWAR AND 2 OTHERS‑Appellants Versus COLONY SARHAD TEXTILE MILLS AND OTHERS‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑ S. O. 12(6) as amended by West Pakistan Industrial and Com mercial Employment (Standing Orders) (Amendment) Ordinance (LI of 1972), S. 6(h)‑Gratuity‑Interpretation of statutes‑Words and phrases ‑Words "shall . . . be paid gratuity equivalent to twenty days' wages", being not technical words, to be construed according to their ordinary meaning ‑Words being also not ambiguous their ordinary meaning not to be curtailed or modified by reference to pre sumptions for construing ambiguities in statutes‑Words, hence, mean and entitle all workmen whose services came to be terminated after promulgation of amending Ordinance to gratuity at rate of twenty days' wages for every completed year of service.‑Interpretation of statutes.‑‑Words and phrases.P L D 1955 Lahore 396
HABIB ULLAH‑ — Petitioner Versus THE CROWN‑ — Respondent
Court:P L D 1960 Lahore 236
THE STATE‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF‑Accused‑Respondent
Court:1997 C L C 1599
Ch. MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH VIRK‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Rana NAZIR AHMAD and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Election TribunalP L D 1994 Karachi 258
Court: ‑‑‑‑Ss. 6(4), 13(a) & 2(f) as amended by Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Act (XVH of 1992)‑‑‑Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1983), Preamble‑‑‑Jurisdiction of Special Court (Banking) enhanced to hear cases where amount of loan did not exceed ten million rupees‑‑‑High Court, in consequence of such amendment, whether continued to have jurisdiction in cases where amount of loan was below ten million rupees and which were pending when amendment came into force‑‑‑Cases which were pending in High Court at the commencement of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, would continue to be heard and decided by High Court‑‑‑Effect of amendment of S.2(f), Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, was that cases filed in High Court after promulgation of the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans; Ordinance, 1979 but before promulgation of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1983 would now be transferred to the Special Court (Banking)‑‑‑Cases filed in High Court and received by High Court on transfer after promulgation of Amending Ordinance II of 1983 and before the enactment of Amending Act XVII of 1992, such of those cases it which amount of loan did not exceed ten million rupees would be transferred to Special Court (Banking)‑‑‑Where amount of loan exceeded ten million rupees, those cases would continue to be tried by High Court.‑‑Interpretation of statutes.