| Case ID |
207f25b0-43c8-46b3-8e03-63ce2aa3b42a |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeals Nos. 1 and 2 of 2008 |
| Decision Date |
Sep 30, 2013 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court dismissed the second appeals filed by the WAPDA against the decision of the lower courts, which had ruled against them in favor of the respondents. The court found that the appeals were time-barred by one year and six days, as the appellants failed to provide sufficient cause for the delay in filing. The court emphasized the principle that government entities must be treated like ordinary litigants regarding the condonation of delay. The appellants argued that the delay was due to late sanction of court-fee; however, they did not satisfactorily explain each day's delay. The court cited several precedents to reinforce its decision, indicating that negligence in pursuing legal remedies does not warrant indulgence from the court. As a result, the applications for condonation of delay were dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeals. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the principles of limitation and the condonation of delays in civil appeals. The Sindh High Court addressed the appeals filed by WAPDA, which were time-barred due to a failure to file within the prescribed period of 90 days. The court underscored the necessity for appellants to demonstrate sufficient cause for every day of delay, a requirement that was not met in this instance. The ruling highlighted that government departments are not entitled to preferential treatment in matters of limitation, reinforcing the notion that all litigants, regardless of their status, must adhere to the same legal standards. This case serves as a significant reference point for future litigations involving governmental entities and their compliance with procedural timelines. It emphasizes the importance of diligence in legal proceedings and the need for meticulous adherence to procedural laws to avoid the dismissal of appeals on technical grounds. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Zafar Ahmed Rajput
|
| Lawyers |
David Lawrance,
Abdul Naeem,
Faisal Naeem
|
| Petitioners |
WAPDA THROUGH CHAIRMAN AND 5 OTHERS
|
| Respondents |
MESSRS KHAN COTTON GINNING FACTORY THROUGH DIRECTOR
|
| Citations |
2014 SLD 677 = 2014 MLD 1639
|
| Other Citations |
Government of Punjab through Chief Secretary Government of Punjab and others v. Syed Muhammad Rafique Shah 2013 SCMR 1468,
Managing Director Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd. Karachi v. Ghulam Abbas and others PLD 2003 SC 724,
Chief Personal Officer, Pakistan Railways, Head Quarter Lahore v. Anjum Farooq and 6 others 1997 SCMR 860,
Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Messrs Azhar Brothers Limited 1990 SCMR 1059,
Government of Punjab, through Secretary (Services), Services General Administration and Information Department, Lahore and another v. Muhammad Saleem PLD 1995 SC 396,
Federation of Pakistan and 5 others v. Jamaluddin and others 1996 SCMR 727,
Lahore High Court v. Nazar Muhammad Fatina and others 1998 SCMR 2376,
Collector Land Acquisition Chashma Right Bank Canal Project, WAPDA v. Ghulam Sadiq and others 2002 SCMR 677
|
| Laws Involved |
Limitation Act, 1877,
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
5,
156,
100
|