Pakistan Case Law
2009 SCMR 1141

YAROON KHAN vs LAL ZADA

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2009 SCMR 1141
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,751-P of 2004
Date2009-04-23
Judge(s)Ijaz-ul-Hassan Khan and Muhammad Qaim Jan Khan
Authored byIjaz-Ul-Hassan Khan
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against the concurrent findings of lower courts and the High Court concerning the failure of the petitioner to deposit deficient court-fee. The core legal question is whether the petitioner committed a wilful default in depositing the court-fee and whether reasonable time and opportunity ought to have been granted by the courts below to make good the deficiency. The Supreme Court of Pakistan granted leave to appeal to examine in detail the contentions raised by the petitioner's counsel, including the willingness of the petitioner to make up the deficient court-fee. The key principle established is that leave to appeal may be granted to examine whether lower courts erred in failing to grant reasonable time or opportunity to rectify a deficiency in court-fee before upholding adverse orders.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether failure to deposit a court-fee amounts to a wilful default warranting strict penal action without granting reasonable time to make up the deficiency?
  • Did the trial Court and Appellate Court err in law by not directing the petitioner to deposit a specific court-fee?
  • Whether the High Court failed to appreciate the matter in its true perspective while upholding the concurrent findings of the two courts below?
leave to appealcourt-feedefaultcivil procedureconcurrent findings

ORDER

' IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J.-- Mr. Mazullah Barkandi, Advocate for the petitioner, contended that petitioner had not committed default wilfully; that learned trial Court had not directed the petitioner to deposit a specific court-fee; that learned trial Court as well as learned Appellate Court has not granted reasonable time to the petitioner to deposit the court-fee; that learned High Court has not appreciated the matter in its true perspective while upholding the concurrent findings of the two Courts below and even now if opportunity is given, petitioner is ready to make up deficient court-fee. Reliance in this context was placed on Mian Khan v. Aurangzeb and 12 others 1989 SCM R 58 and. Memon Educational Board and Society, Karachi, v. Munawar Hussain 2003 SCM R 157.

2. Leave to appeal is granted in this petition to examine in detail the above contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner.##TE#

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