Legal Case Summary

Case Details
Case ID 10418815-8944-4010-8107-0a549ebefeb7
Body View case body.
Case Number R.Y.K.HAN-73 of 1984
Decision Date Jun 04, 1986
Hearing Date May 31, 1986
Decision The appeal was dismissed as time-barred due to the appellant's gross negligence in failing to file within the prescribed period. The court found that valuable rights had accrued to the respondent as a result of the lapse of time, which could not be disregarded without sufficient cause. The appellant had acted on the wrong advice of counsel but failed to show vigilance in pursuing the appeal after other related appeals were decided. Therefore, the delay in filing the appeal was not condoned.
Summary This case involves the Labour Appellate Tribunal's decision regarding the appeal filed by an employee against the dismissal from service on grounds of misconduct. The central issue was the delay in filing the appeal, which the appellant attributed to the advice of two lawyers. However, the Tribunal concluded that the delay was excessive and unjustified. The ruling emphasized the importance of timely action in legal proceedings, particularly in cases where rights of others may be affected. This case illustrates the principles of industrial relations law and the significance of adhering to limitation periods in legal appeals. Keywords: Labour Appellate Tribunal, Industrial Relations Ordinance, Limitation Act, appeal dismissal, legal advice negligence.
Court Labour Appellate Tribunal, Punjab
Entities Involved United Bank Limited
Judges Sardar Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, Ehsanulhaque
Lawyers Aqa Asif Jaffry, Pervaiz Ahmad Bajwa
Petitioners
Respondents United Bank Limited
Citations 1986 SLD 2454, 1986 PLC 1122
Other Citations Not available
Laws Involved Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, Limitation Act, 1908
Sections 37, 38(3), 5