Acquiescence
Acquiescence legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Meaning.
Meaning.
Assistant Advocate General being a Public Prosecutor was competent to file an appeal against acquittal under S.417, Cr.P.C.
Samples of pesticides recovered from the business premises of the accused at the time of raid were found to be adulterated on analysis
Accused had also tendered in his defence a copy of rep'claimed to have been issued by NARC showing the sample handed over t0 m to be of specified quality
None from the office of NARC had come ward to verify the said report
Trial Magistrate had himself written a letter NARC and on receipt of letter therefrom had accepted the report as be` gospel truth and proceeded to give its benefit to the accused which eras an unwarranted and uncalled for exercise
Report tendered by the used in his defence had to be proved by a competent person from NARC a having appeared in the witness-box in defence of the accused which was done Order of acquittal passed by Magistrate was set aside in circumstances and the case was remanded to him for holding de novo proceedings in accordance with law.
Meaning.
"Acquiescence", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/14212
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Acquiescence"
1999 P L C (C
UMAR HAYAT Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others
Court: Supreme Court (AJ&K)1991 P L C (C
MUHAMMAD YAQOOB KHAN Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others
Court: Service Tribunal Azad Jammu and KashmirP L D 1991 Supreme Court 777
SAKHI MUHAMMAD and another‑‑Petitioners Versus CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ISLAMABAD‑‑Respondent
Court: ‑‑‑‑ Art.189 ‑‑‑ Decision of Supreme Court‑‑‑Binding nature ‑‑‑ Prospectivity‑‑ Acquiescence ‑‑‑ Land acquisition ‑‑‑ Compensation ‑‑‑ Land owner had acquiesced in the award for compensation in 1968 and had not moved in the matter thereafter when the judgment of the Supreme Court was announced whereunder the circular under which compensation had been awarded to the land owners and which was not so beneficial to them was held to be without lawful authority‑‑ Land owner who had acquiesced in the award invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court and contended that the effect of said declaration by Supreme Court was that he was entitled to a more beneficial treatment in accordance ‑with law and that the decision of Supreme Court justified reopening of his claim to the due compensation according to law as declared by the Supreme Court ‑‑‑ Held, consequence of the Supreme Court judgment was that as from the date of decision all Courts subordinate to the Supreme Court and all executive and quasi‑judicial authorities were obliged by virtue of the Constitution to apply the rule laid down by the Supreme Court in cases coming up before them for decision ‑‑‑ Decision of the Supreme Court did not have and it could not he contended that it had, the effect of altering the law as from the commencement o relevant law so as to render vo:d of its own force all relevant orders of the Authority or of the High Court made in the light of the earlier interpretation.‑ Land acquisition ‑‑‑ Acquiescence.1987 S C M R 816
Mst. IRSHAD BEGUM‑‑Petitioner Versus LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and others‑‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑Arts. 185(3) & 199‑‑Punjab Acquisition of Land (Housing) Act (VIII of 1973), S. 11‑‑Acquiescence‑‑Acquisition of land for housing scheme‑ Petitioner accepted exempted plot and paid development charges for same‑‑Subsequently challenged unsuccessfully legality of acquisition proceedings and adequacy of compensation awarded for land and structure thereon‑‑Petitioner having accepted exempted plot and failing to show that amount awarded did not represent proper value of structure, leave to appeal refused.‑‑ Acquiescence .P L D 1967 Dacca 250
BADSHA MEAH SOWDAGAR‑Petitioner Versus NURUL HAQ AND OTHERS‑Opposite‑Parties
Court:P L D 1980 Karachi 126
HAJI DAWOOD-Appellant Versus Mst. RAHIMA BAI AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Court: 13(2)-Sub-tenancy--Waiver-Sub-tenancy acquiesced in by landlord-Right to object-No longer available-Party acquiescing in breach of right or waiving his right-Debarred from `pleading for or enforcing his right.-Acquiescence.2010 P L C (C
MASROOR HUSSAIN and 45 others Versus CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES and another
Court: Karachi High Court1988 S C M R 723
CHIEF ENGINEER, BUILDING DEPARTMENT‑‑Appellant Versus Messrs PAKISTAN NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION‑‑Respondent
Court: ‑‑‑S.9‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art.185(3)‑‑Leave to appeal granted in view of the law to the effect that an aggrieved party after having raised objection to the jurisdiction of an Arbitrator was not bound to retire from the proceedings and by mere participation in the proceedings after such objection, such party would not ,lose the right to object to the award on the same ground.‑‑ Award.1980 S C M R 590
Raja QURBAN KHAN-Petitioner Versus BEGUM M. M. SHARIF AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Court: --Ss. 13(2) (ii) (b) & 11-Residential premises-Change in character of-Acquiescence-Rent deed showing premises having been let out as a house and not for commercial purposes-Assuming landlord to have acquiesced in" use of house as hotel even then contention as regards acquiescence of landlord of no avail-Tenant, even if no legal bar existing in his way, held, could not have put house to commercial purposes without written consent of Rent Controller. Acquiescence1989 M L D 488
GHULAM MUHAMMAD‑‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD DIN and others‑‑Respondents
Court: Lahore