ABDULLAH KHAN AND Others vs KHALIL AHMAD AND Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which was challenged on the grounds of being time-barred. The core legal question addressed is whether a delay in filing a petition for leave to appeal can be condoned when the petitioner fails to provide a sufficient explanation for the period between receiving the refusal of a certificate under the Letters Patent and the actual filing of the petition. The Court held that the petition was barred by 248 days and dismissed it accordingly. The ratio of the decision emphasizes that while the time spent obtaining a certificate for appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent may be condoned, the petitioner must demonstrate continuous diligence and provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The Court established the principle that delay in civil matters is not to be lightly excused, as the lapse of time creates valuable rights for the opposing party that cannot be arbitrarily extinguished. Consequently, without a valid explanation for the specific period of delay, the petition was rejected as time-barred.
- Does the period of limitation for filing a petition for leave to appeal run from the date of the judgment in second appeal?
- Can delay in filing a petition be condoned if the petitioner fails to explain the entire period of delay?
- Is delay in civil matters to be lightly excused by the court?
- Clause 10, Letters Patent
ORDER
1. HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-This petition is barred by 248 days. In the application for condonation of delay, there is no explanation whatsoever for the delay in the filing of the petition between the 31st of January 1972, when the copy of the order refusing the certificate under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent was received and the 24th of February 1972, when the petition was filed.
2. It is now well-settled that the limitation begins to run from the date of tile judgment in second appeal, but the period spent in obtaining a certificate for appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent may be condoned if it is found that the petitioner has been diligent throughout and is in a position to explain the delay.
3. The delay is not to be lightly excused in civil matters, because by the lapse of time, valuable rights accrue to the other side and they cannot be taken away lightly. This has been repeatedly laid down by this Court in the cases of Paresh Chandra Biswas v. Tapen Kand Choudhury (PLD1963SC598) and Kalachand Sikdar v. Fazlur Karim Mian (16DLR417(SC)).
4. This petition is accordingly dismissed as being barred by time.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN vs MUHAMMAD SADIQ 1986 MLD 1012