| Case ID |
08be13e8-3fcf-4266-8ae1-70274674da10 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No.336 of 1987 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 19, 1991 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled that the appeal filed by the Cantonment Board, Kharian Cantt was rightly dismissed as time-barred by the Additional District Judge. The court found that the appellant did not adequately explain the reasons for the delay in obtaining the certified copies of the judgment and decree. The decision emphasized the importance of adhering to the provisions of the Limitation Act, particularly the necessity to show sufficient grounds for seeking condonation of delay. The court reiterated that mere absence of a communicated date for delivery of copies does not absolve the applicant from the responsibility of due diligence in collecting the copies in a timely manner. As the appellant failed to establish any case for exclusion of time under the relevant sections of the Limitation Act, the dismissal of the appeal was upheld. |
| Summary |
In the case of Cantonment Board, Kharian Cantt vs. Muhammad Sham, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed significant issues regarding the Limitation Act IX of 1908, focusing on the interpretation of sections 5 and 12 concerning the condonation of delay and the exclusion of time requisite for obtaining certified copies. The court evaluated the circumstances under which the appeal was filed and the necessity for the parties to demonstrate due diligence in collecting required documents. The decision highlighted that the days spent waiting for certified copies, when properly documented and communicated, could affect the appeal's timeliness. The ruling serves as an important precedent in understanding the procedural obligations of litigants concerning the Limitation Act, emphasizing that sufficient cause must be shown for each day's delay when seeking condonation. This case reiterates the critical balance between procedural compliance and the right to seek judicial redress. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Cantonment Board, Kharian Cantt,
Muhammad Sham
|
| Judges |
NASIM HASAN SHAH,
RUSTAM S. SIDHWA
|
| Lawyers |
M. Maqbul Sadiq,
S. Inayat Hussain,
Ch. Muhammad Aslam
|
| Petitioners |
CANTONMENT BOARD, KHARIAN CANTT.
|
| Respondents |
MUHAMMAD SHAM
|
| Citations |
1991 SLD 499,
1991 PLD 400
|
| Other Citations |
Fateh Muhammad v. Malik Qadir Baksh 1975 SCMR 157,
Mst. Jameela Khatoon v. Mst. Tajunnisa PLD 1984 SC 1208,
Gul Muhammad v. Allah Ditta PLD 1960 Lah. 443,
Muhammad Afzal v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan PLD 1968 Lah. 1205,
West Pakistan Industrial Development Corporation v. Aziz Qureshi PLD 1973 SC 222,
Syed Faiz Ali Shah v. Chief Administrator of Auqaf 1974 SCMR 33 = PLD 1974 SC 17,
Rahim Baksh v. Mst. Pothani PLD 1985 SC 324,
Ahmad Nawaz v. Muhammad Ayub PLD 1988 SC 258,
Fazal Rahman v. Karim Gul 1988 SCMR 1256
|
| Laws Involved |
Limitation Act IX of 1908,
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
|
| Sections |
5,
12,
3,
185(3)
|