RAJ MUHAMMAD vs Mst. CHAN BIBI AND OTHERS
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the High Court, which had dismissed the petitioner's appeal due to being filed in the wrong forum and subsequently rejected a request for condonation of delay. The petitioner had originally filed an appeal against a decree for the recovery of money in the Court of the District Judge, Haripur, before later approaching the High Court. The core legal question was whether the delay in filing the appeal in the correct forum could be condoned on the basis of a bona fide mistake by counsel. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, finding that the forum for the appeal was not in doubt. The Court held that where the law regarding the appellate forum is clear, a mistake by counsel resulting from gross negligence does not constitute a valid ground for condoning the delay. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, affirming that no benefit of a bona fide mistake can be granted in such circumstances.
- Can a delay in filing an appeal be condoned when the appellant mistakenly files the appeal in the wrong forum due to counsel's negligence?
- Is a mistake regarding the correct appellate forum considered a valid ground for condonation of delay under the law of limitation?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C. J.-One Abdul Majid Khan now represented by his legal representatives sued the petitioner for the recovery of Rs, 70,000 and interest at the rate of 13 per cent per annum on the basis of a pronote and a receipt dated 4th of November, 1974. These documents were executed by Zarin Khan, who died issueless leaving the petitioner as his sole survivor. The suit was decreed on 28th of June, 1983, and an appeal was filed in the Court of the District Judge, Haripur on 16th of July, 1983, which was dismissed on 21st of February, 1984.
2. The petitioner next filed an appeal in the High Court alleging that he had earlier filed an appeal in a wrong forum and sought for the condonation of delay, but the High Court rejected the appeal on the ground that there could not be two opinions as to the forum in which the appeal should have been filed and as no valid reason was given as to why the appeal had been filed before the District Judge, there was no occasion to condone the delay, and the appeal was, accordingly, disposed of.
3. ' In Mst. Mahmooda Begum and others v. Major Malik Muhammad Ishaq and others C. A. No, 208 of 1977 we have held that no benefit of any bona fide mistake can be given as the provision, relating to the forum where the appeal should have been filed, was not in doubt, and if the council had made a mistake on account of his gross negligence that cannot be a reason for condoning the delay.
4. ' Accordingly, we find the order of the High Court to be unexceptionable, and dismiss the petition.
Cited by 10 cases
- KHUSHI MUHAMMAD through L.Rs, and others vs Mst. FAZAL BIBI and others- 2016 SCP 61, 2016 PLD Supreme Court 872
- PARVEEN AKHTAR and 3 others vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, MUZAFFARABAD and others 2015 PLD High Court (AJ&K) 7
- PARVEEN AKHTAR and 3 others vs ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSION JUDGE, MUZAFFARABAD and 5 others 2016 PLJ AJ&K 19
- FAZAL ELAHI vs Chaudhry AKHTAR ALI 2011 YLR 1311
- FAZAL ELAHI vs Ch. AKHTAR ALI 2012 PLJ Peshawar 1
- SARDARAZ KHAN and 36 others vs AMIRULLAH KHAN and 34 others 1995 PLD Peshawar 86
- PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Through Collector, District Attock And 4 Others vs MUHAMMAD NAWAZ 1994 CLC 666
- 1993 PTD 1622 1993 PTD 1622
- MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and 4 others vs Mst. MASOODA HASAN and 2 others 1993 PLD Queeta 88
- Khushi Muhammad (deceased) through L.Rs. (in C.A.2564_2001) and 7 others vs Mst. Fazal Bibi etc. (in C.A.2564_2001)and 7 others 2016 SCP 61