1986 SCMR 1062

YAHYA BAKHTIAR vs Shaikh SHAUKAT ALI And Other

Share on WhatsApp ⭐ Prefer in Google

Citation1986 SCMR 1062

CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan

Case No.Original Petition No. 5-R of 1986

Date1986-02-28

Judge(s)Muhammad Haleem, C.J. Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Nasim Hassan Shah, Shafiur Rahman and Zaffar Hussain Mirza

Authored byMuhammad Haleem

ResultH.

AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan regarding an office objection concerning the petitioner's failure to deposit a mandatory fee of Rs.500, which was a prerequisite for the entertainment of the petition. Upon the matter being fixed for orders, the petitioner failed to appear, and the required deposit remained unpaid. Furthermore, the Court examined the nature of the dispute raised in the proceedings and determined that the issues presented were not appropriate for resolution by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the Court held that the petition was not entertainable due to both the procedural default in depositing the required fee and the substantive unsuitability of the dispute for adjudication by the apex court. The petition was disposed of accordingly.

Questions settled in this judgment

Can a petition be entertained by the Supreme Court if a mandatory fee has not been deposited?
Is a dispute that is deemed inappropriate for the Supreme Court's jurisdiction liable to be dismissed?
What is the consequence of a petitioner's failure to appear when a matter is fixed for orders?

office objectionmandatory depositentertainability of petitionprocedural defaultSupreme Court jurisdiction

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.--There was an office objection that the petitioner had not deposited Rs.500 which was imperative before the petition could be entertained by the office. This matter and also the matter on merits was fixed in Court for orders. Neither the petitioner is present nor has the amount been deposited. Moreover, we do not consider the dispute raised in these proceedings to be an appropriate issue to be resolved by this Court.

2. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of as not being entertainable.