YUSUF ALI KHAN, BARRISTER-AT-LAW vs Messrs HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI
This petition for leave to appeal was filed against an order of a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court dated 18-11-1992 passed in C.M. No. 279-B of 1992 in C.O.S. No. 37 of 1989. The petitioner contended that under the relevant amended law, no provision exists for the transfer of pending cases, and further argued that the legal precedents relied upon in the High Court's impugned order were inaptly applied. The Supreme Court observed that the case raised a question of statutory construction of public importance regarding whether pending cases could be transferred in the absence of an express statutory provision under the amended law. Concluding that a substantial legal question required further examination, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal. Additionally, the Court directed that the interim order previously passed on 4-1-1993 shall continue to operate in the interim pending the final disposal of the appeal.
- Does the amended law contain a provision for the transfer of pending cases?
- Whether reliance on precedents concerning case transfers is applicable under the amended statutory framework?
' ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM, J.---Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against an order of a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court in C.M. No,279-B of 1992 in C.O.S. No,37 of 1989 dated 18-11-1992.
2. Contention is that under the amended law, there is no provision for transfer of pending cases and the reliance on the precedents quoted in the impugned order is not quite apt. Question of statutory construction of public importance arises in this petition. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted. Interim order dated 4-1-1993 shall continue in the meanwhile.