WAQAR SAHGAL And Others vs NATIONAL INVESTMENT TRUST And Other
This matter arises from execution proceedings where the petitioners filed an appeal in the Lahore High Court challenging an order denying them an opportunity to produce evidence. The High Court accepted the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the case to the executing court for a fresh decision after framing issues and permitting evidence. The petitioners sought leave to appeal before the Supreme Court, contending that the High Court failed to determine certain legal issues raised by them. The core legal question was whether the High Court was bound to decide academic legal points unrelated to the specific grievance redressed. The Supreme Court held that the High Court was not required to determine legal points that had no relevance to the successfully redressed grievance, noting that academic discussions belong elsewhere. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.
- Whether the High Court is required to determine legal points that have no relevance to the specific grievance redressed?
- Can a case be remanded to the executing court for decision afresh after framing of issues and recording of evidence?
ORDER
ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM, J.---In execution proceedings, the petitioners filed E.F.A. No. 104 of 1983 in the Lahore High Court, Lahore. The grievance of the appellants that "they had been denied opportunity of evidence to prove their assertions", was found to be "not without force". The appeal was accordingly accepted. Impugned order was set aside and case "remanded to the learned Executing Court for decision afresh after framing of issues and giving of opportunity to the parties to produce their evidence." This is vide order dated 24-10-1989. The appellants/petitioners seek leave to appeal.
2. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners had raised legal issues, which have not been determined by the learned High Court.
3. The contention of the learned counsel is totally devoid of force. The grievance of the petitioners before the High Court was "that they had been denied opportunity of evidence to prove their assertions". The submission was accepted, appeal was allowed and case "remanded to the executing Court for decision afresh after framing of issues and giving of opportunity to the parties to produce their evidence". In the circumstances, the learned High Court was not required to determine the legal points raised which had no relevance for the decision of the grievance urged and which was redressed. For academic discussion the forums are elsewhere or the universities.
4. There is no merit in this petition. It is, therefore, dismissed.