Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 1825

ABDUL KHALIQ and others vs MUHAMMAD ALI and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 1825
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,452 of 1983
Date1988-08-10
Judge(s)Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal
Authored byMuhammad Afzal Zullah
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for leave to appeal arises from a civil dispute concerning the redemption of property. The trial court initially passed a preliminary decree in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. Subsequently, the petitioners' appeal against this decree was dismissed by the appellate court on the procedural ground that the petitioners failed to file a copy of the formal decree along with their memorandum of appeal. This decision was upheld by the High Court in civil revision proceedings. The petitioners challenged this dismissal before the Supreme Court, contending that the issue regarding the necessity of filing a formal decree with the memorandum of appeal was a significant legal question requiring further examination, particularly in light of previous Supreme Court precedents. Finding that the matter involved a substantial legal question similar to issues raised in other pending matters, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal. The Court directed that the appeal be prepared on the existing record and scheduled it to be heard alongside the cited precedent to ensure consistency in the adjudication of procedural requirements for filing appeals.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is it mandatory to file a copy of the formal decree along with a memorandum of appeal in a suit for redemption of property?
  • Does the failure to attach a formal decree to a memorandum of appeal justify the dismissal of the appeal?
civil revisionpreliminary decreeredemption of propertymemorandum of appealprocedural requirementsleave to appeal

ORDER

1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--This petition for leave to appeal by the defendants, calls in question the dismissal of their civil revision by the High Court.

2. ' The case related to redemption of property. The trial Court passed a preliminary decree in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. The petitioners' appeal was dismissed on the ground that they had not submitted a copy of the formal decree with the memorandum of appeal. This view was affirmed by the High Court while dismissing petitioners' civil revision.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, relying on Muhammad Mast v; Inayat (1987 SCM R 364), has contended that the question involved in this case is similar to the one in respect of which leave was granted in the cited case.

4. ' Leave to appeal is granted in this case also.

5. ' Security Rs,5,000.

6. ' The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction for the parties to file all necessary documents. It shall be heard together with the said case.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.