Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 1204

ABDUS SATTAR and others vs NAWAB DIN and others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 1204
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petitions Nos.1140 of 1984 and Criminal Original 10 of 1986
Date1988-06-06
Judge(s)Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan
Authored byMuhammad Afzal Zullah
ResultPetitions dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

These two matters arise out of the same case, involving a civil petition for leave to appeal concerning a pre-emption matter and a related contempt application. In Civil Petition No. 1140 of 1984, the vendees challenged the dismissal of their civil revision by the High Court, focusing primarily on the question of limitation. The core legal question examined was whether the pre-emption suit filed on 1-9-1975 was time-barred, considering that the trial court was closed on 31-8-1975. The Supreme Court held that since the suit could not have been instituted prior to 31-8-1975 due to the court closure, a suit filed on the next open day (1-9-1975) was within time, thereby refusing leave to appeal. Additionally, the Court declined to deal with the contempt application on merits at this stage, resulting in the dismissal of both petitions. The key principle laid down is that when a court is closed on the last day of limitation, a suit instituted on the next immediate working day is within time.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether a pre-emption suit filed on the reopening day of a court is within time when the limitation period expired while the court was closed?
  • Can a contempt application be dismissed without being addressed on merits at a preliminary stage?
pre-emptionlimitationcourt closurecivil revisioncontempt application

ORDER

1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--These two matters arise out of the same case.

2. ' In C.P. 1140 of 1984 the vendees' side in a pre-emption matter have called in question the dismissal of their Civil Revision by the High Court.

3. The only point now left for examination, according to the learned counsel is of limitation. It was observed in the impugned judgment that taking into consideration the fact that the suit could not have been instituted prior to 31-8-1975 when the trial Court was closed, the respondents' suit filed on 1-9-1975 could not be dismissed as time-barred. After some discussion learned counsel had nothing to say against this obvious position. Leave to appeal accordingly is refused.

4. ' In so far as the contempt application (Criminal Original No,10 of 1986) is concerned, we do not consider it proper to deal with it on merits at this stage. Therefore, this petition is also dismissed.

Cited by 2 cases

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