Pakistan Case Law
1985 SCMR 1209

MA HMOOD vs MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE (Deceased) And Other

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1985 SCMR 1209
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.R.S.A. No. 915 of 1976
Date1985-02-19
Judge(s)Aslam Riaz Hussain and Shafiur Rahman
Authored byShafiur Rahman
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter involves a petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, arising from a trial court's decision concerning the payment of court fees and the effect of a compromise on a suit. The core legal questions presented for examination are two-fold: first, whether the trial court's failure to explicitly indicate a deficiency in court fees entitles a plaintiff to condonation of delay in payment, particularly in light of established precedents such as Shahna Khan v. Aulia Khan and others, Siddique Khan v. Abdul Shakur Khan, and Gulzar Husain v. Abdur Rehman; and second, whether a trial court is justified in dismissing an entire suit despite a compromise having been reached between the plaintiff and a vendee. The Court granted leave to appeal to resolve these issues, directing that the appeal be heard on the existing record while permitting the parties to submit additional documentation as necessary. The order establishes the scope of the appellate review regarding procedural compliance in court fee matters and the impact of partial compromises on litigation.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the failure of a trial court to indicate a deficiency in court-fee entitle a plaintiff to condonation of delay in payment?
  • Can an entire suit be dismissed notwithstanding a compromise entered into between the plaintiff and a vendee?
leave to appealcourt fee deficiencycondonation of delaycompromise decreeprocedural lawdismissal of suit

ORDER

1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--Leave to appeal is granted to examine the following to questions of law arising in the petition:-.

(1) Whether in view of the decisions in:

(i) Shahna Khan v. Aulia Khan and others PLD 1984 SC 157,

(ii) Siddique Khan v. Abdul Shakur Khan PLD 1984 SC 289 and (i.e) Gulzar Husain v. Abdur Rehman and another 1985 SCMR 301. The failure of the trial Court to indicate the deficiency in court-fee was not as held by the trial Court sufficient to entitle the plaintiff even if some delay had taken place in paying the necessary court-fee, to condonation.

2. (2)Whether the entire suit of the plaintiff could be dismissed not with--standing a compromise entered into between the plaintiff anti Allah Wasaya vendee.

3. Security Rs.2,000.

4. The appeal to be heard on the present record with liberty to the parties to file such additional documents as they may consider necessary.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.