SULTAN vs MUHAMMAD FEROZE
This matter originated as a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioner's applications for the restoration of a civil revision. The petitioner had initially filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell land in 1981, which was decreed by the trial court but subsequently dismissed by the Additional District Judge on appeal. The petitioner then filed a civil revision in 1984, which was dismissed for non-prosecution in 1995. After a delay of approximately four years, the petitioner sought restoration of the revision, which the High Court dismissed on the grounds of limitation. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court's refusal to restore the revision petition, filed after a significant delay, was legally infirm. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any legal infirmity or misreading of evidence in the impugned order. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, affirming that the petitioner lacked a meritorious case and had failed to justify the substantial delay in seeking restoration.
- Can a civil revision dismissed for non-prosecution be restored after a delay of four years?
- Does the dismissal of a restoration application on the grounds of limitation warrant interference by the Supreme Court?
ORDER
1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the order, dated 27-9-1999 of a learned Single Judge of-the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby C.Ms. Nos. 1-C and 2-C of 1999 in Civil Revision No.602-13 of 1984 filed by the petitioner were dismissed.
2. ' Briefly stated facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a suit on 25-10-1981 claiming relief of specific performance of an agreement to sell land measuring 35 Kanals, 3 Marlas or in the alternative, a decree for recovery of Rs.38,000 was prayed for. The respondent contested the same and the trial Court through its judgment, dated 8-10-1983 decreed the suit. However, on appeal filed by the respondent, learned Additional District Judge, Jauharabad, reversed the above judgment and dismissed the suit. The petitioner filed Civil Revision No.602-D of 1984 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore which has been dismissed for non-prosecution by a learned Single Judge through his order, dated 22-2-1995.
3. After a period of about four years the petitioner filed an application for restoration of aforesaid civil revision but the same has been dismissed on the ground of limitation. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
4. ' We have considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel and have gone through the entire documents appended with this petition carefully. Learned counsel failed to point out any legal infirmity or any misreading in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. Even otherwise, the petitioner has got no case on merits. In this view of the matter, this petition being devoid of any force is dismissed and leave declined.