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

Restitution

Restitution legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2020 CLC 1989 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent
S.144Restitution

Scope.

2017 CLC 646 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN Judicial Precedent
S. 144RestitutionScope and object

Where a decree passed by a Court of first instance had been varied or reversed, said Court on the application of any party entitled to any benefit should cause such restitution and place the parties in a position which they had prior to the decree

Question of restitution would arise where a decree was passed in favour of one party and the decree holder obtained subject matter of the decree in execution of the same but decree on appeal or revision was reversed or varied

Object of restitution was to place the parties in the same position which they would have occupied prior to the decree

Court to whom such application was filed had powers to order for restitution and for refund of costs and for payment of interest, damages, compensation and mesne profits which were consequential on such variation or reversal

Party who suffered a loss on account of wrong decree must be compensated

Initial decree of Trial Court was liable to be set aside

Any benefit received by the decree holder under the decree refundable or returnable and parties were entitled to benefit of restitution on the variance or reversal of the decree.

2016 SCMR 1773 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Principles

Restitution was ordered against the holder of a decree who had deprived the other party of some benefit on the basis of such decree

Upon variance or reversal of the decree, the Court called upon the decree holder to restitute the said benefit.

2011 PLD 62 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN Judicial Precedent
S. 144RestitutionPre-conditions

From any act of any court no suitor should be injured, therefore, any benefit, which is refundable and returnable to a party entitled to such benefit through restitution upon variation or reversal of a decree take the benefit of principle of restitution reflected in S.144, C.P.C.

Main conditions, which are to be fulfilled for invoking provisions of S.144, C.P.C. being that (i) restitution must be in respect of a decree, which has been varied or reversed; (ii) party applying for restitution should be entitled to a benefit under a reversing or variation decree; and (iii) relief claimed must be properly consequential on reversal of variation of decree.

1988 CLC 665 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S. 17RestitutionCivil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss.144 & 151

Principle of restitution is inherent in the exercise of judicial authority so that status quo ante can be required to be restored-Though provisions of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 do not apply to the family cases, the principles thereof, to the extent, that they are based on equity and good conscience, would apply.

1949 PLD 7 REVENUE-DECISION-PUNJAB Judicial Precedent
Restitution Restitution

Petition for-Competent at any time. The reversioners can make a petition under section 4 of the Punjab Act No. 4 of 1938 at any time after 15th May, 1939 (the date when the Act came into force) and no handicap by way of limitation Act seems to stand in their way. 1946 L L T 6 Feel.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Restitution", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/1653

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Restitution"

CLC 2006
Writ Petition No.3998 of 2005/BWP, decided on 21st December, 2005.

2006 C L C 1185

Mst. KAUSAR JABEEN — Petitioner- Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and another — Respondents

Court: Lahore
MLD 2000
Writ Petition No. 160 of 1996, decided on 23rd November, 1999.

2000 M L D 796

MALIK AMAN and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus FIDA MUHAMMAD and 4 others‑‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Peshawar
CLC 2020
2020-July-2

2020 C L C 1813

MUHAMMAD ATIF IQBAL and others — Petitioners Versus ZEESHAN ALI and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 1991
N/A

P L D 1991 Lahore 251

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, ATTOCK

Court: High Court
CLC 1998
Writ Petition No. 15140 of 1996, heard on 14th November 1997.

1998 C L C 1043

Mst. IMTIAZ BIBI and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ABDUL QADIR SHAD and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1999
Civil Revision No.2366 of 1995, decided on 2nd June, 1999.

1999 C L C 1432

Mst. NAEEMA BEGUM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus IQBAL ALI KHAN and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
MLD 2001
Writ Petition.No.4375 of 1987, heard on 27th October, 2000

2001 M L D 1044

BARKAT ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAISALABAD and 5 others‑‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1982
W Civil Revisi5n No. 512‑D and Civil Miscellaneous No. 1584 of 1981, decided on 2nd May, 1981.

1982 C L C 223

AHMAD HASSAN KHAN‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ARSHAD‑Respondent

Court: Lahore
CLC 1985
Writ Petition No. 4109 of 1984, heard on 12th November, 1984.

1985 C L C 687

JALAL DIN and another — Petitioners Versus NAZIR HUSSAIN and 4 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1984
Transfer Application No. 102‑C of 1983, decided on 17th December, 1983.

1984 C L C 2301

TASLEEM AKHTAR‑ — Petitioner Versus HAFADAT — ‑Respondent

Court: Lahore