ABDUL LATIF vs JAMAL DIN
This matter concerns a petition for withdrawal filed by the Attorney for the appellant in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, citing a lack of cooperation from both the client and the engaged counsel regarding the preparation of the concise statement. The Court addressed the procedural failure to progress the case despite multiple adjournments. Consequently, the Court ordered that a notice be issued to the appellant to show cause why the leave to appeal previously granted should not be rescinded and the petition dismissed for non-prosecution. Furthermore, the Court directed the engaged counsel to appear and provide an explanation for the failure to prepare the requisite concise statement. As an immediate consequence of the lack of prosecution, the Court vacated the stay order that had been previously granted in favor of the appellant.
- Can a petition be dismissed for non-prosecution when counsel fails to prepare a concise statement?
- Does the failure of a client and counsel to cooperate in case preparation justify the rescission of leave to appeal?
- Can a stay order be vacated by the Court due to the appellant's failure to prosecute the case?
ORDER
1. S. A RAHMAN, J.-Mr. Z. A. Qureshi Attorney in this case, appears without his Counsel. Shaikh Mahboob Elahi, and puts in petition for withdrawal from the case on the ground that neither his Counsel nor the client have co-operated with him in getting the concise statement prepared. Let a notice issue to the appellant personally to show cause why the leave granted should not be rescinded and his petition dismissed for no prosecution. Counsel should also be notified to appear and explain why he has not been able to prepare the concise statement in spite of several adjournments granted in the case. The stay order previously granted by this Court is hereby vacated.