Pakistan Case Law
1970 SCMR 65

RIAZ K. HAQ AND Others vs SAID K. HAQ

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1970 SCMR 65
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No: 178 of 1967 Civil Revision No 197
Date1967-10-10
Judge(s)A. R. Cornelius, C: J. and Fazle‑Akbar
ResultN/A
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a procedural adjournment by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in a case involving the registration of an arbitration award. The core legal question addressed by the Court was whether it was appropriate to proceed with an application to make an arbitration award a rule of court while the registration of that same award was currently being challenged in a separate writ petition before the High Court. The Supreme Court held that it was necessary to adjourn the current petition sine die, pending the final outcome of the High Court proceedings. The Court reasoned that the validity and enforceability of the award in the civil proceedings were contingent upon the Registrar's order regarding registration being maintained. Consequently, the Court directed that the proceedings before the Civil Judge be kept alive but stayed, prohibiting any final order from being passed until the High Court resolved the writ petition. This decision establishes the principle that where a fundamental prerequisite for a legal remedy is sub judice in a parallel proceeding, the court should stay the main matter to avoid inconsistent or premature adjudications.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a court proceed with an application to make an arbitration award a rule of court while the registration of that award is challenged in a pending writ petition?
  • Is it appropriate to adjourn a petition sine die when the outcome of a parallel writ petition determines the viability of the main proceedings?
arbitration awardregistration of awardadjournment sine diewrit petitionstay of proceedingscivil litigation

ORDER

1. CORNELIUS, C. J.-This order may be read in continuation of our order of yesterday in this case.

2. Mr. M. Shafi states the following facts. The Registrar of Lahore District made an order for registration of the award, but the opposite-party moved a writ in the High Court, and registration has been stayed, pending disposal of the petition.

3. It becomes necessary to adjourn the hearing of this petition, until the final result of the writ petition is known. If the Registrar's older is maintained, the petitioner's could then move for further proceedings in their application before the Civil Judge in respect of the award, once it is registered.

4. It is, there--fore, necessary to keep the latter proceedings alive.

5. This petition is adjourned sine die. Either party may apply to have it heard, if and when a decision is reached in the writ petition before the High Court. In the meantime no final order shall be made in the proceedings for making the award a rule of Court, which are pending in the Court of the Civil Judge.

6. Petition adjourned sine die.

Cited by 1 case

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