Home Maxims & Terms Shall meaning in Urdu
Word Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Shall

Shall legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2005 CLC 103 BOARD-OF-REVENUE-SINDH Judicial Precedent
"Shall"

Meaning and import.

2001 CLC 848 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Shall" and "may"Connotation

Ordinarily the word "shall" is construed as couching a mandatory provision, but very often the words "shall" and "may" connote interchangeable concepts.

2000 PLD 108 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Words "may" and "shall "Connotation

Interchangeability.

1999 YLR 77 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR Judicial Precedent
"May ", "shall" and "must "Meaning and scope

As a general rule word "may" gave impression of its being enabling directory or discretionary power, while words "shall" and "must" gave impression of their being imperative, obligatory and mandatory but same were not tied up with hard and fast rule of being discretionary or imperative

Said words could be used interchangeably

Circumstances and fact of each case would determine interchangeability or convertability of words "may" for "shall" or "must" and vice versa

With change in circumstances, meanings and force of law also changed

Word "shall" under some circumstances, could not be treated and read as of mandatory connotation while same word from same law could be treated as of mandatory nature, if circumstances changed and requirement of time so warranted

Courts had to keep in view circumstances of each case while interpreting a word used in a legal instrument

Courts had not to be oblivious of ground realities.

1992 SCMR 468 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Words and Phrases

Word "shall" used with reference to procedure for appointment or promotion, would signify that procedure prescribed in relevant rules had to be followed for appointment by promotion.

1992 PLC(CS) 421 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Word "shall" used with reference to procedure for appointment or promotion, would signify that procedure prescribed in relevant rules had to be followed for appointment by promotion.

1992 PLD 307 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Words "may" and "shall" are interchangeable.

1992 CLC 1437 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Words and Phrases Word "shall"

Meaning.

1991 PLD 400 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

"Shall" when appears in a statute "is used as a term of art to impose a duty to do what is prescribed, not a discretion to do it or not according to whether it is reasonably practicable to do it or to do something like it instead"

1991 PTD 946 INCOME-TAX-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PAKISTAN Judicial Precedent
Word "shall" whether mandatory or directory in nature

Test.

1991 PTD 583 INCOME-TAX-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PAKISTAN Judicial Precedent

......Shall" and "may" are interchangeable depending on the nature of a particular provision in which the word has been used.

1988 CLC 1652 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
S. 3

Word 'shall' as used in S.3 of Act VI of 1937??Meaning, scope and import of??Word "shall" in the context cf S.3 of the Act, would convey meaning of the word "may", thereby investing Court with discretion to order staying of proceedings before an arbitrator?Courts would always lean to interpretation of a provision of a statute which could preserve jurisdiction of the Court instead of its ouster.?? [Interpretation of statutes].

1987 CLC 1647 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Words "may" and "shall"Interpretation

The words "may" and 'shall' are interchangeable, dependent on the context.

1986 CLC 1613 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Words and Phrases Word "shall"MeaningDirectory and not mandatory

Sind Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979), S.5.

1984 SCMR 493 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Words "may", "shall" and "must"-Connotation-Intent of Legislature-Held, guiding factor-Interpretation of statutes.

1980 CLC 1289 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

"May", "must", "shall"-Interpretation-"May" in ordinary usage permissive and "must" imperative-Words "may" and "shall"-Interchangeable in legal phraseology depending on context in which used and not to be interpreted with rigidity attributed to them in ordinary parlance.-[Interpretation of statutes].

1977 PLD 1068 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Word "shall" employed in statute Meaning.

1972 PLD 326 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Interpretation of statutes-Words "may" and "shall"-Interchangeable, depending on context to which they are used.

1957 PLD 1 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Words and Phrases

"Shall"-Whether directory or mandatory-Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 63, 69 (2), 96 (1), 102 (2), 1,24, 190 and 191 (6)

Word "shall" directory (obiter).

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Shall", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/3994

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Shall"

SCMR 2020
Civil Miscellaneous Applications Nos.7923 and 7617 of 2019 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 8758 of 2018, Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1878 of 2020 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.7617 of 2019 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 8758 of 2018 and Civil Miscellaneous Application No.2012 of 2020 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 8758 of 2018 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 376-K of 2014 in Suo Motu Case No. 03 of 2009, decided on 20th October, 2020.

2020 S C M R 2122

N/A

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
SCMR 1989
Constitutional Case No. 1 of 1988, decided on 18th September, 1988.

1989SCMR139

N/A

Court: High Court
PLD 2019
2019-January-17

P L D 2019 Supreme Court 357

CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY and others — Petitioners Versus SUPREME APPELLATE COURT GILGIT-BALTISTAN and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PCRLJ 1984
Criminal Miscellaneous No.814-B of 1983, decided on 22nd September, 1983.

1984 P Cr

GHULAM SARWAR and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Lahore
SCMR 2018
Civil Petition No. 39-K of 2018, decided on 3rd September, 2018.

2018 S C M R 1991

Mst. MADIHA YOUNUS — Petitioner Versus IMRAN AHMED — Respondent

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD 2005
2005-May-23

P L D 2005 Karachi 591

QAMAR UL ISLAM and another — Petitioners Versus DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE/CHAIRMAN ELECTION TRIBUNAL, NAWABSHAH and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
YLR 1999
Writ Petition No.2406 of 1999, decided on 22nd March, 1999.

1999 Y L R 2297

SULTAN MAHMOOD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, LODHRAN‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Lahore
SCMR 2020
Civil Petition No. 815-K of 2016 and C.R.P. 19-K of 2017, C.M.A. No. 391-K of 2017 in C.R.P. No. 19-K of 2017, decided on 22nd January, 2019.

2020 S C M R 111

ABDUL KARIM — Petitioner Versus NASIR SALIM BAIG and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD 2022
2021-September-1

P L D 2022 Lahore 224

Qari MUHAMMAD ATTA ULLAH — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, SIALKOT and another — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 2021
2021-April-7

P L D 2021 Lahore 605

GHULAM YASIN BHATTI — Appellant Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND HUMAN RIGHTS, ISLAMABAD and another — Respondents

Court: High Court