Haji MUHAMMAD ISMAIL And Others vs WADHO AKHARO TRUST
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Sind High Court dated 10-12-1984, which dismissed a revision application filed by the petitioners and upheld the concurrent judgments and decrees of the trial court and the District Judge, Thatta. The core legal question concerned whether the High Court erred in refusing to exercise its revisional jurisdiction under the law. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that no exception, either in law or on facts, could be taken against the High Court's refusal to interfere with the concurrent findings through its revisional jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of subordinate courts upheld in revision by the High Court unless a clear error of law or fact warrants the exercise of appellate jurisdiction.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with the concurrent findings of lower courts upheld by the High Court in revision?
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be maintained against a High Court's refusal to exercise revisional jurisdiction when no error of law or fact is shown?
ORDER
1. ABDUL KADIR. SHAIKH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of a learned Judge of Sind High Court, dated 10-12-1984 dismissing a revision application filed by the petitioners whereby they challenged judgment and decree passed by the trial Court which was upheld on appeal by the District Judge, Thatta.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the appeal was find that no exception in law or on facts can be taken with the learned Judge in the High Court in refusing to exercise the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.