AHMAD SAEED AND OTHERS vs THE MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE AND OTHERS
This matter concerns three Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal filed against a common judgment delivered by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court. The primary legal question presented in these petitions pertains to the correct interpretation of the provisions of Section 114, as introduced by the Punjab Tenancy (Amendment) Act 1952. The Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed the issue of a three-day delay in filing one of the petitions, ultimately condoning the delay subject to all just exceptions. Regarding the merits, the Court observed that leave to appeal had already been granted in a connected matter, Ghulam Fatima and others v. Rahim Bakhsh and others, which involved the same legal question regarding the interpretation of the aforementioned statutory provision. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal in the present petitions as well, directing that they be heard alongside the connected case. The Court further ordered the provision of security in the amount of Rs. 1,000 for each case and permitted the parties to supplement the existing record with additional documents as necessary.
- Can a delay in filing a civil petition for special leave to appeal be condoned if the reasons provided are sufficient?
- Does the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal when the central legal question is already pending in a connected matter?
- Section 114, Punjab Tenancy (Amendment) Act 1952
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN. SHAH, J.-This order will govern Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No, 573 of 1977, Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No, 577 of 1977 and Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No, 622 of 1977, as they are directed against a common judgment delivered by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court.
2. ' Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No, 622 of 1977 is barred by three days but the delay, for the reasons stated in the application for condonation is condoned, subject to all just exceptions.
3. ' In all the three cases, the principal question relates to the true interpretation of the provisions of section 114 added by the Punjab Tenancy (Amendment) Act (VII of 1952). To consider this question, leave has already been granted in Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No, 247 of 1978 [Ghulam Fatima and others v. Rahim Bakhsh and others 1].
4. ' Leave to appeal is, accordingly, granted in these petitions 'as well. To be heard alongwith the said case.
5. ' Security Rs, 1,000 in each case.
6. ' Appeals to be made ready on the present record, with liberty to the parties to add further documents, if necessary.
7. ' All these matters to be fixed for hearing at a very early date. NLR 1979 Rev. SC 2141