MUHAMMAD YAQOOB ETC. vs DEPUTY SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LAND)
This review petition was filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan seeking review of its previous order dated 1st June 1978, whereby Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 222 of 1978 was dismissed. The original petition was dismissed on the primary ground that the underlying High Court order was a consent order, disentitling the petitioners from reopening the matter. The petitioners sought review on the contention that they had not consented to the arrangement proposed by their counsel during the writ petition hearing in the High Court and therefore should not be bound by the consent order. The Supreme Court observed that this specific contention had neither been raised before the High Court nor before the Supreme Court during the hearing of the main petition. Consequently, the Court held that raising a new plea regarding lack of consent for the first time in review proceedings provides no valid justification for reviewing a previous order. The review petition was accordingly dismissed.
- Can a review petition be entertained on grounds and pleas that were never raised before the High Court or the Supreme Court during the main proceedings?
- Whether a client can challenge a consent order in review on the ground that counsel lacked consent when such objection was not raised earlier?
ORDER
1. ANWARUL HAQ, C. J.-This petition seeks a review of the order of this Court dated the 1st June, 1978, by which Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal Bearing No. 222 of 1978, was dismissed, mainly on the ground that the order made by the High Court was in the nature of a consent order, and, accordingly, the petitioners could not be permitted to re-open the matter. In coming to this conclusion special notice was taken of the observations made by the learned Judge in the High Court while dismissing the review application filed on behalf of the petitioners.
2. Review is sought on the ground that the petitioners has not consented to the arrangement suggested by their counsel at the time of the hearing of the writ petition in the High Court, and accordingly, they could not be bound by the consent order made by the learned Judge.
3. We notice that this point was not raised before the High Court, no before this Court at the time of hearing of the main petition. Such submission, accordingly, does not furnish any justification for review of our previous order.
4. The review petition, accordingly, fails and is hereby dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases
- Syed Ali Ahmed Shah vs Syed Shoukat Hussain Shah & Others 2024 SCP 413, 2025 SCMR 361
- Syed ALI AHMED SHAH Versus Syed SHOUKAT HUSSAIN SHAH 2025 SCMR 361