THE TEXTILE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN HYDERABAD vs PAKISTAN TEXTILE
This matter came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan following the issuance of a show-cause notice to the appellant for failing to deposit the required security for costs. The core legal question was whether an appeal should be dismissed when the appellant fails to appear in response to a show-cause notice or deposit the necessary security. The Supreme Court held that the appellant's failure to appear or respond to the show-cause notice indicated an intention not to prosecute the appeal. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, making no order as to costs. The key principle laid down is that an appeal may be dismissed for non-prosecution if the appellant fails to comply with procedural requirements, such as depositing security for costs, and subsequently fails to appear in response to a show-cause notice.
- Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the appellant fails to deposit the security for costs and fails to appear in response to a show-cause notice?
- What is the consequence of an appellant's failure to respond to a show-cause notice regarding procedural non-compliance?
ORDER
1. ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, ACTG. C.J.-- The show-cause notice was issued to the appellant for not depositing the security for costs. None has, appeared in response to the show-cause notice on behalf of the appellant. It seems that the appellant does not want to prosecute the appeal.
2. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution but with no order as to costs.