Pakistan Case Law
2008 SCMR 335

ABDUL MAJID and another, vs MUHAMMAD HANIF

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2008 SCMR 335
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,2763-L of 2002
Date2004-08-25
Judge(s)Rana Bhagwandas and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi
Authored byRana Bhagwandas
ResultOrder accordingly
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition filed against the Lahore High Court judgment dated 18-4-2002, wherein the High Court allowed a civil revision application and remanded a pre-emption suit to the trial court for decision in accordance with the law. The core legal question raised before the Supreme Court was whether the suit for pre-emption filed by the respondent was maintainable and within time, making the plaint liable to rejection. The court held that since the High Court remanded the matter to the trial court, the questions touching the merits and the root of the case should properly be urged before the trial court. The Supreme Court disposed of the petition with the observation that the petitioner may agitate these questions before the trial court, which shall consider and determine them strictly on merits in accordance with law. The key principle laid down is that foundational questions regarding the maintainability and limitation of a suit should be agitated before and determined by the trial court upon remand.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether a pre-emption suit is maintainable and within time when challenged through a petition for leave to appeal?
  • Can questions touching the merits and root of the case be urged before the trial court upon remand?
  • Should the trial court consider and determine questions of maintainability and limitation strictly in accordance with law?
pre-emptionremand of suitmaintainabilitylimitationrejection of plaint

ORDER

1. ' RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.--- In this petition, against the Lahore High Court judgment, dated 18-4- 2002, learned counsel vehemently contended that the suit for pre-emption filed by the respondent was neither maintainable under the law nor within time and thus, the plaint was liable to rejection which aspect was not taken into consideration by the High Court while allowing civil revision application filed by the respondent. Since High Court has remanded the suit to the trial Court to decide the same in accordance with law, it would be proper that these questions, touching the merits of the claim and root of the case, are urged before the Court of ultimate jurisdiction. Learned counsel would like to agitate these questionings before the trial Court which shall be duly considered and determined on merits, strictly in accordance with law.

2. ' With these observations, this petition is disposed of.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.