KARIM DAD vs SARFRAZ KHAN
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal in limine of the petitioner's second appeal by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench. The core legal question concerns whether a party can challenge the correctness of a deliberate concession or admission made by their counsel during the hearing before the High Court. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that a deliberate admission made by counsel after addressing arguments cannot be subsequently challenged in the Supreme Court. The petition was accordingly dismissed. The key principle laid down is that admissions made by counsel during judicial proceedings are binding on the client and cannot be reopened or contested in appellate review before the apex court.
- Can a party challenge the correctness of a deliberate admission made by their counsel in the High Court?
- Whether a second appeal can be dismissed in limine when no question of pre-emption arises due to an assignment of occupancy rights rather than a sale of ownership?
- Is an admission made by counsel after addressing arguments binding on the petitioner in appellate proceedings?
ORDER
' M. S. H. QURAISHI, J.-The petitioner's second appeal was dismissed in limine by a Rawalpindi Bench of the Lahore High Court for the reason that no question of pre-emption arose as by the admission made by the petitioner's own counsel there had been no actual sale of ownership rights but only an assignment of occupancy rights.
2. Learned counsel questions the correctness of the concession made by the petitioner's counsel before the High Court. The impugned order shows that the petitioner's counsel had made the admission after having addressed his arguments before the Court. The admission was, therefore, deliberate. In any case, the question of correctness or otherwise of the admission made by the petitioner's counsel cannot be challenged here. The petition is dismissed.