| Case ID |
1b7be7eb-50cc-4c76-806a-b769a737416c |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Suit No. 558 of 1997 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 13, 2006 |
| Hearing Date |
Feb 06, 2006 |
| Decision |
The court determined that the application to implead the legal heirs of the deceased defendant was filed after an excessive delay of about 29 months, while the law stipulated a period of only 90 days for such applications. The court noted that the reason for seeking condonation of delay was merely unawareness of the suit's pendency, which was not deemed a valid justification. Consequently, the legal heirs were barred from participating in the proceedings, and the suit would proceed against the deceased defendant. Any judgment rendered would carry the same weight as if it had been issued during the defendant's lifetime. The applications for impleading the heirs were dismissed, and the case was directed to be fixed for final disposal. |
| Summary |
In this notable case from the Sindh High Court, the issue revolved around the death of a defendant and the subsequent ability of his legal heirs to participate in ongoing litigation. The plaintiff, Trading Corporation of Pakistan (PVT.) LTD., had filed a suit against Messrs Syed Corporation, but the sole proprietor of the defendant company passed away during the pendency of the case. The court examined the rules under the Civil Procedure Code and the Limitation Act to determine the appropriate procedures following the defendant's death. The court emphasized the importance of timely applications to implead legal heirs, highlighting that failure to comply with statutory deadlines would result in the exclusion of those heirs from the proceedings. The court also stressed that mere ignorance of the suit's status could not justify delays in filing necessary applications. This case underscores the critical nature of adhering to procedural timelines in civil litigation, particularly in situations involving deceased parties, and serves as a reminder of the legal repercussions of non-compliance. Keywords such as 'Civil Procedure Code', 'Limitation Act', 'legal heirs', 'litigation', and 'court decision' are essential for understanding the implications of this ruling. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
FAISAL ARAB, J
|
| Lawyers |
Mamoon Hassan,
Khalid Dawood Pota,
Agha Faquir Muhammad
|
| Petitioners |
TRADING CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
|
| Respondents |
Messrs SYED CORPORATION
|
| Citations |
2006 SLD 3047,
2006 PLD 258
|
| Other Citations |
Bhagvan Managi Marwadi and others v. Hiraji Permaji Marwadi AIR 1932 Bombay 516,
Ismail Haji Sulaiman v. Messrs Hansa Line and another PLD 1961 Dacca 693,
Collector of Customs (Appraisement), Collectorate of Customs, Government of Pakistan Customs House v Messrs Imran Enterprises through Proprietor and others 2001 CLC 419,
Messrs M.A. Majeed Khan v. Karachi Water and Sewerage Board and others PLD 2002 Kar. 315,
Bibi Khudeja v. Pir Sarwarduddin Shah 1992 MLD 490,
Mst. Sardar Begum v. Mst. Chiragg Bibi 1989 CLC 825,
Messrs Ahan Saz Contractors v. Pak Chromical Limited 1999 MLD 1781
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),
Limitation Act (IX of 1908)
|
| Sections |
O. XXII, R.4,
S.5,
Art.177
|