GHULAM HUSSAIN And Others vs SHER MUHAMMAD
This matter originated as a civil revision petition before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, challenging a High Court judgment regarding the restoration of a pre-emption suit. The core legal question concerns the interpretation of the limitation period for filing an application to restore a suit dismissed for non-prosecution. Specifically, the Court must determine whether the limitation period under Article 163 of the Limitation Act 1908 commences from the date of the dismissal of the suit or from the date the plaintiff acquires knowledge of such dismissal. The petitioners contend that the High Court erred by applying a 'date of knowledge' standard, arguing that Article 163 explicitly prescribes a thirty-day limitation period starting from the date of dismissal, whereas the 'date of knowledge' standard is reserved for defendants under Article 164 of the Limitation Act 1908. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to consider whether the High Court misconstrued the statutory limitation provisions applicable to plaintiffs versus defendants in cases of default dismissal, thereby necessitating a definitive interpretation of the commencement of limitation under the relevant articles.
- Does the limitation period for an application to restore a suit dismissed for non-prosecution under Article 163 of the Limitation Act 1908 commence from the date of dismissal or the date of knowledge?
- Is the 'date of knowledge' standard applicable to plaintiffs seeking restoration of a suit dismissed for default under the Limitation Act 1908?
- Does Article 164 of the Limitation Act 1908 govern the limitation period for plaintiffs or defendants in the context of suit restoration?
- Article 163, Limitation Act 1908
- Article 164, Limitation Act 1908
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J --This petition is directed against the judgment of the High Court, dated 19-6-1983, dismissing their civilrevision in a pre-emption case.
2. The facts, briefly, are that' Sher Muhammad etc. Had filed a pre-emption suit on 13-9-1975 against Ghulam Hussain etc. (petitioners herein) in the Court of Civil Judge at Sargodha. This case was subsequently transferred to the learned Civil fudge at Shahpur, which was received in his Court on 30-10-1980. It was fixed for hearing for 26-11-1978. On that date the plaintiffs-respondents did not appear and the suit was, therefore, dismissed for non-prosecution. An application for restoration of the said suit was filed by the plaintiffs on 6-10-1979 i.e. After about 11 months and the same was dismissed by the learned trial Court on 24-3-1980, holding that it was barred by time. It was, however, held that the plaintiffs-respondents had no knowledge of the date of hearing i.e. 26 -11-1978 on which date the suit was dismissed in default.
The plaintiffs filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Sargodha, which was accepted on 28-6-1981 on the ground that a notice served on the counsel engaged to prosecute the case at Sargodha did not amount to a notice to him as far as the prosecution of the case at shahpur was concerned. The plaintiffs filed a Revision Petition before the High Court which was allowed on the ground that limitation for filing an application for restoration of the suit under Article 163 of the Limitation Act would commence from the date the plaintiff came to know about the dismissal of his suit.
3. Learned counsel argued before us that the impugned judgment of the High Court is based on a misconception inasmuch as that Article 163 of the Limitation Act which applies to the case of the 'plaintiffs' prescribes that the limitation of 30 days shall commence from the date of the dismissal of the suit and, as such, the date on which the plaintiffs came to know of the dismissal is irrelevant.
He submitted that date of knowledge is relevant only with respect to defendants, which is governed by Article 164 of the Limitation Act.
4. The question needs consideration. Leave is, therefore, granted for this purpose.
Security in the sum of Its. 2 000.
5. To be heard on the same record with permission to file additional documents.