MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN SHAH and others vs SAJJAD HUSSAIN and another
This matter concerns a review petition filed against a judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan dated 5-2-1989. The petitioners sought to challenge the previous decision by relying on the Lahore High Court judgment in Ghulam Hussain and others v. Khan Muhammad and others (PLD 1954 Lah. 655), arguing that the strict requirements of Order XXIII, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 were not satisfied, thereby rendering the appeal against the defect maintainable. The Supreme Court, in its review jurisdiction, examined the contentions raised by the petitioners. The Court held that the arguments presented had already been adequately considered and addressed in paragraphs 8 and 13 of the original judgment sought to be reviewed. Finding that no valid grounds for review were established, the Court dismissed the petitions. The judgment reaffirms the principle that a review petition cannot be used to re-argue matters that have already been adjudicated and addressed in the original decision, particularly when the legal precedents relied upon were previously noted and evaluated by the Court.
- Does a review petition lie when the grounds raised were already considered and addressed in the original judgment?
- Are the requirements of Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 satisfied when a court has already evaluated the relevant legal precedents in its judgment?
- Order XXIII Rule 3, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
ORDER
1. ' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.-- In seeking review of our judgment, dated 5-2-1989 the learned counsel for the petitioners has heavily relied on the decision of the Lahore High Court given in the case of Ghulam Hussain and others v. Khan Muhammad and others PLD 1954 Lah. 655 to contend that the strict requirements of Order XXIII, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure were not satisfied to bar an appeal against the defect. This judgment has been taken note of in the judgment whose review is sought, in paragraph 8 and has been adequately dealt with in paragraph 13.
2. ' No ground is made out for review and the petitions are dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases
- AMEER UMAR and another vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, DERA GHA7I KHAN 2010 SCMR 780
- AMEER UMAR AND ANOTHER vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, DERA GHAZI 2010 NLR Revenue 102