Home Maxims & Terms Expressio Unius Alterius Exclusio meaning in Urdu
Maxim Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Expressio Unius Alterius Exclusio

Expressio Unius Alterius Exclusio legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

1987 PLD 213 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

"Expressio unius alterlus exclusio" (express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another).

1975 PLD 32 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Expressio Unius Alterius Exclusio

Expressio unius exclusio alterius (the mention of one is exclusion of another Rule not absolute in-its application.

1972 PLD 201 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

(i) Expressio unius personae vel rei, est exclusio alterius (express mention of one person or thing Is the exclusion of another) and (ii) Expressum facit cessare taciturn (what is expressed makes what is silent to cease).

1971 PLD 217 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Maxim: expressio unius alterius exclusio (express mention of one thing implies exclusion of another)-Statute limiting a thing to be done in a particular form necessarily includes negative i.e., thing shall not be done otherwise-Expression of a condition-Excludes doing of authorised act otherwise than as authorised.

1965 PLD 453 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 43 (6) [as substituted by Pakistan (Administration of Evacuee Property) (Amendment) Ordinance (LXIII of 1962)] read with saving provision contained in S. 4 of Ordinance, and with 6(c), (e), General Clauses Act (X of 1897)Review-Extent of termination, by amending Ordinance, of Custodian's jurisdiction to review his order-Pending proceedings in review suo motu, or on application, treated on different footing by saving provision of S. 4 of Ordinance (LXIII of 1962)Section 6 (c) (e), General Clauses Act (X of 1897) cannot be invoked to continue review proceedings-Such proceedings do not pertain to a "substantive" right as contemplated by cl. (c) of S. 6, General Clauses Act, 1897 but to a procedural right, i.e. a right of review-Section 6, General Clauses Act, 1897, only applies when a different intention does not appear

Such intention, however, appears from saving S. 4 of Ordinance (LXIII of 1962)-Suo motu review not intended to be saved by provisions of S. 4 of Ordinance (LXIII of 1962)-Maxim: Expressio unius exclusio alterious, not of universal application Proceedings in review started on direction of Ministry, Refugees and Rehabilitation, Government of Pakistan, not deemed to be started on "application" but treated as suo motu in character.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Expressio Unius Alterius Exclusio", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/3125

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Expressio Unius Alterius Exclusio"

PLD 1971
16th March 1970

P L D 1971 Lahore 217

Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD DIN AND ANOTHER‑Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 1991
1991-March-26

P L D 1991 Lahore 268

THE STATE — Appellant Versus NAVID ASIF and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
CLC 1987
Civil Transfer Application No.28 and Civil Miscellaneous Application No.776 of 1987, decided on 17th August, 1987.

1987 C L C 2516

MUHAMMAD, YUSUF‑‑Applicant Versus ASGHAR ALI and 5 others‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑Ss. 4(3) & 20‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 24‑‑Maxim; Expressio unius est exclusio alterius (the express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another) ‑‑Neither the Rent Controller nor the Appellate Authority has power under C.P.C. to transfer a case from one Rent Controller to another Rent Controller‑ ‑Govern men t and not the High Court is empowered to authorise District Judge or Deputy Commissioner to transfer a case from one Rent Controller to another within the District‑ ‑Non ‑issuance of notification by Government authorising District Judge/Deputy Commissioner in that regard, would .not confer any power on the High Court. ‑‑Maxim.
PLD 1976
Transfer Application No. 304/C of 1975, decided on 23rd January 1976.

P L D 1976 Lahore 392

UNITED BANK LTD.‑Petitioner Versus ABDUL KHALIQ AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: --S. 15(4), Explanation read with Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss. 24, 151, 4(1), 96 & 100 and Maxim : Expressio unius est exclusio alterious‑Transfer of proceedings‑Sections 96 and 100, C. P. C., alone having been made applicable to proceedings under Ordinance VI of 1959, and section 4(1), C. P. C. not affecting any special or local law or any special form of procedure prescribed by any other law, maxim "Expressio unius est exclusio alterius", held, steps in and other provisions of C. P. C. including Ss. 24 & 151 rendered inapplicable to proceedings before Rent Controller‑High Court in circumstances, not to transfer proceedings pending before Rent Controller under S. 24 or 151, C. P. C.‑Maxim.
CLC 1987
Writ Petition No. 339 of 1987, decided on 13th April, 1987.

1987 C L C 1397

PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, LAHORE‑‑Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

Court: Lahore
PLD 1979
Constitutional Petition No. 1146 of 1974, decided on 12th August 1978.

P L D 1979 Karachi 204

MESSRS RASHID TEXTILE MILLS LTD., KARACHI-Petitioner Versus BAKHT ZAMAN AND 2 OTHERS-Respondents

Court: -- S. 0.12(5) read with S. O.'15-Termination of service on allegation of misconduct-Mention of only permanent and temporary workmen and total omission of probationer and badli workman in S. O. 12(5)- Held, clear indication that provisions relating to enquiry were not applicable to probationer and badli workman-Maxim: expressio unius est exclusio alterius (mention of one is exclusion of another). Industrial dispute-Maxim.
PLD 1977
Writ Petition No. 2208 of 1977, decided on 20th September 1977.

P L D 1977 Lahore 1437

GHULAM MUHAMMAD MUSTAFA KHAR‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF PAKISTAN AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: (a) Homes of Parliament and Provincial Assemblies (Elections) Order, 1977 President's (Post Proclamation) Order 5 of 1977‑
CLC 1987
Writ Petition No. 4439 of 1986, decided on 21st April, 1987.

1987 C L C 1503

THE CHAIRMAN, WAPDA and 2 others‑‑Petitioners Versus ADVISORY BOARD, PUNJAB LAHORE and 2 others‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 1981
Writ Petition No. 9061 of 1980, decided on 14th October, 1980.

P L D 1981 Lahore 244

ZAFARULLAH‑Petitioner Versus BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY

Court: Art. 199‑Writ petition, maintainability of‑Student petitioner's case finding him guilty of adopting unfair means at examination under consideration on appeal before Appellate Committee‑Writ petition against order holding him guilty nevertheless, held, maintain able.‑Educational Institutions.
PTD 2003
Wealth Tax. Appeals Nos.80 to 85 of 2001, decided on 18th February 2003.

2003 P T D 1276

Miss SUMBLEEN ANWAR and others Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Court: Karachi High Court