Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 1245

DIN MUHAMMAD and others vs ADMINISTRATOR, THAL DEVELOPMENT

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 1245
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No,330 of 1985
Date1989-03-29
Judge(s)Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan
Authored byMuhammad Afzal Zullah
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a petition for leave to appeal arising from a dispute involving the Administrator, Thal Development. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners are entitled to relief on the basis of similar points already adjudicated by the court in a prior precedent, namely Rab Nawaz Khan and others v. Administrator, Thal. The Supreme Court, having considered the arguments from both sides—including the respondents' statement that no effective relief was claimed against their client—granted leave to appeal, holding that the case warrants further examination in light of the cited precedent. The key principle laid down is that where similar points of law and fact have been settled in prior judgments, leave to appeal may be granted to ensure consistency in judicial determination.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether leave to appeal should be granted when similar points have been raised and settled in a prior precedent?
  • Can a petition succeed on the basis of points decided in earlier judgments between similar parties or subject matters?
leave to appealThal DevelopmentprecedentSupreme Court of Pakistan

ORDER

1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.-- Learned counsel has, in support of this petition, stated and argued that similar points having been raised in 'Rab Nawaz Khan and others v. Administrator, Thal (1988 SCMR 797), the petitioners would succeed in this case also on the basis thereof. Learned counsel from the respondents' side has tried to distinguish it but with a statement that no effective relief has been claimed against his client.

2. ' In view of what is stated above we consider it a fit case for grant of leave to appeal. Order accordingly.

3. ' Security Rs,5,000. Stay to continue.

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