Public Notice

2025 CLC 1109 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 30 & 31Suit for possession through pre-emption, filing ofLimitationPublic noticeSections 30 & 31 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991Nexus

Section 31 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991 ('Act') exclusively deals with the issuance of public notice by the officer registering the sale deed or attesting the mutation of sale within two weeks of registration or attestation as the case may be, whereas limitation for instituting a suit for pre-emption is to be regulated by S. 30 of the Act

Sections 30 & 31 of the Act neither have any nexus nor are dependent on each other, rather both are independent having no effect or impact on each other, thus, non-issuance of notice in terms of S. 31 of the Act would have no adverse effect on the provision of S. 30 regulating the limitation for institution of suit for pre-emption.

2021 PTD 815 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss.194-A(1), 194-B, 196 & First Sched.ReferenceClassification of goodsPakistan Customs Tariff HeadingPublic notice

Respondents-importers assailed assessment of goods before Appellate Authority on the ground that the same was due to a mistake, as in the year 2018 tariff headings were rationalized and amended

Appellate Authority and Customs Appellate Tribunal decided the matter in favour of respondents-importers

Validity

Internationally TV sets were not specified in two (2) dash (

) heading of 8528.72 (other, colour); in Pakistan the same was bifurcated into a (3) dash (

) heading of television set with a further bifurcation into three new and local (4) dash (

) sub-headings

LED or LCD panels imported with or without parts was to be classified as a complete set

Merely by placing reliance on a public notice which had no relevance with tariff heading in question did not suffice

Authorities had themselves created new sub-headings for LCD/LED in CKD and SKD conditions

LCD and LED panels did not fall in a residuary heading of Others (8528.7219)

Authorities by themselves decided the issue in favour of respondents-importers by creating a new (4) dash (

) sub-heading, rendering public notice of no relevance, rather making it infructuous post 2018

High Court rephrased questions of law framed by authorities and decided the matter in favour of respondents-importers

Reference was dismissed, in circumstances.

2019 MLD 1882 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

DefamationPublic noticeMaintenance of decencyScope

Claim of a person, acting bona fide, in matters of public notice does not give him a license to couch such 'public notice' in a manner and fashion which may or is likely to result in crossing the limits, violation of ethical values, decency and other laws of the land.

2019 MLD 1882 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

DefamationPublic noticeMaintenance of decencyScopeLiability of publisherScope

Public notice is got flashed in a newspaper yet it is always based on request of some specific person hence, normally no responsibility is attached to the publisher except that he shall always keep the line of decency in view even while flashing the public notice because the phrase "freedom of press" is not synonym to unfettered powers to publish whatever one (publisher) wishes.

2019 MLD 1882 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Public notice

Meaning.

2019 MLD 1882 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

DefamationPublic noticeMaintenance of decencyLiability of publisherLiability of initiator of newsScope

Even an admission of the publisher that the news has caused defamation shall not entitle the plaintiff for a relief against him, unless it is established that he had any malice on his part or that he had added or substituted any 'indecent' word in press release, provided by a person (initiator of the news).

2019 MLD 1882 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

DefamationPresumptionScopePublic notice

Where it is established that a public notice contained an allegation, direct or indirect, which caused prejudice or harm to the plaintiff, then it shall be presumed that the maker of such public notice has defamed the plaintiff, particularly when plaintiff claims to have been defamed in result of such public notice.

2008 PTD 1535 Customs, Central Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Judicial Precedent

S.156Public noticeLegality of

Public notice issued by the Collector had hardly any legal sanctity behind it as the public notice had been published that some importers were importing Polyester Fabrics against Import Policy Order, so in, future they will have to produce certificate issued by the manufacturer and it was not proved that Public Notice had been brought to the notice of the importer.

1995 PCRLJ 494 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Public NoticePublished in newspapersLegal effect

Publication of notice/intimation by any Government Department or Corporate Body in newspapers would not assume the form of a legal provision having sanction of law and it will only be a one-sided assertion and a unilateral intention of a public functionary autonomous or semi-autonomous body.