MUHAMMAD YUSUF vs SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER And Other
This matter concerns two petitions for special leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal and a writ petition due to abatement. The core legal question was whether the High Court correctly dismissed the proceedings after the death of a respondent, Haider Bakhsh, where the petitioners failed to implead his legal representatives within the prescribed period of limitation and did not seek condonation of delay. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, finding no infirmity in the conclusion that the proceedings had abated. The High Court had observed that because the parties resided in the same premises, the petitioners could not have been unaware of the respondent's death, thus negating any justification for the delay. The Supreme Court affirmed that failure to bring legal representatives on record within the statutory limitation period, without a valid application for condonation of delay, results in the abatement of the proceedings. Consequently, the petitions for special leave to appeal were dismissed, maintaining the finality of the High Court's order regarding the procedural lapse.
- Does the failure to implead legal representatives of a deceased respondent within the limitation period result in the abatement of a writ petition?
- Can a court dismiss a proceeding as abated when the applicant fails to seek condonation of delay for impleading legal representatives?
- Is the knowledge of a respondent's death by the petitioner a relevant factor in determining whether to condone a delay in impleading legal representatives?
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.-- These are two petitions for special leave to appeal from the judgment dated 21-5-1985 of the Lahore High Court.
2. The petitioners in the two petitions filed separate writ petitions in the High Court to challenge the transfer of certain quarters which had been made jointly in favour of Fateh Muhammad and Haider Bakhsh. The petition filed by the petitioner in Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal No.806 was dismissed by the learned Chief Justice on 23-4-1969. She and two others filed a letters patent appeal. On 28-3-1970 while the L.P.A. And the writ petition filed by the petitioner in Civil Petiti6n for Special Leave to Appeal No.805 were still pending Haider Bakhsh I died. The applications for impleading his legal representatives were made after the expiry of the period of limitation without seeking condonation of the delay. The High Court noticed that the parties lived in the same premises and as such the petitioners could not be l unaware of Haider Bakhsh's death. Accordingly, it held that both the L.P.A. And the writ petition had abated and dismissed them on this ground.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and do not find that the order of the High Court in holding that the L.P.A.I and the writ petition had abated suffers from any infirmity. These petitions are accordingly dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.