| Case ID |
038e61d2-7da9-48af-83fd-491aac0d4aad |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Regular Second Appeal No. 34 of 1955 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 12, 1957 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The appeal was dismissed due to the failure of the appellant to provide sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal beyond the prescribed period of limitation. The court emphasized that merely erroneous advice from counsel does not automatically condone delays. The appellant was required to explain the delay between the time the copy of the trial Court's judgment was obtained and the actual filing of the appeal. Since the appellant failed to provide a valid explanation for this extended delay, the appeal could not be maintained. |
| Summary |
In the case of Regular Second Appeal No. 34 of 1955 decided by the Lahore High Court, the central issue revolved around the Limitation Act, 1908, specifically sections 5 and 12, which address the timelines for filing appeals. The appellant, Muhammad Iqbal Khan, faced challenges in justifying the delay in filing his appeal against the Notified Area Committee Kot Radha Kishan. The court highlighted that time spent obtaining a copy of the trial Court's judgment could be condoned under section 5, but only if sufficient reasons were provided for any additional delays. The court ultimately dismissed the appeal, reinforcing the principle that not all erroneous advice from lawyers suffices to excuse delays in legal proceedings. This case serves as a critical reminder of the importance of adhering to legal timelines and providing adequate explanations for any delays, especially in the context of appeals. Legal practitioners and individuals involved in litigation should be aware of these nuances to ensure compliance with procedural requirements, thereby safeguarding their rights and interests in the judicial process. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
AKHLAQUE HUSSAIN, J
|
| Lawyers |
Muhammad Nadir for Appellant,
Mahbub Elahi for Respondent
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD IQBAL KHAN
|
| Respondents |
NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE KOT RADHA KISHAN
|
| Citations |
1957 SLD 45,
1957 PLD 381
|
| Other Citations |
Madangopal v. Malawa Ram 68 I C 777,
Gurdit Singh v. Charan Das 72 I C 797,
Babu Singh v. Mangat Ram 100 I C 854,
Shah Qumari Charan v. Din Dayal 148 I C 818,
George Gowshala v. Balak Ram A I R 1927 Lah. 717,
Sardar Prithi Pal Singh v. Pandit Hans Raj A I R 1939 Lah. 378,
Ghulam Husain Bahadur P L D 1954 Lah. 361,
Mst. Ghulam Aishan Bibi v. Muhammad Sharif A I R 1936 Lah, 1007
|
| Laws Involved |
Limitation Act, 1908
|
| Sections |
5,
12
|