| Case ID |
20d75f6d-96e4-4670-a484-6dc96c79578d |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeals Nos. 157 to 166 of 1974 and Civil Ap |
| Decision Date |
Dec 17, 1986 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether the High Court was correct in determining that the appellant was bound by the finding of the High Court and that she was duly represented by her constituted attorney in a constitutional petition. The Court also scrutinized the issue of whether the appellants, who did not appeal to the Supreme Court but were parties in the constitutional petition before the High Court, were bound by the order of the High Court despite the Supreme Court's declaration of the order of allotment as valid. The Court discussed the principles of res judicata and stare decisis, emphasizing the importance of these doctrines in maintaining legal certainty and stability. The decision outlined that while res judicata applies strictly to the same parties, stare decisis offers flexibility and can be applied to different parties based on established legal principles. Ultimately, the Court highlighted that the law cannot remain static and that judicial precedents must evolve to ensure justice and equity. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Pakistan concerning land allotment disputes. The Supreme Court examined multiple civil appeals concerning the High Court's decisions on land allotment issues, emphasizing the principles of res judicata and stare decisis. The Court's ruling underscores the significance of these doctrines in maintaining legal certainty while allowing for necessary flexibility in the application of law. The Court also analyzed the implications of previous decisions on current cases, noting that appellants who did not appeal to the Supreme Court were bound by the High Court's decisions. This case is pivotal in understanding the dynamics of land allotment law, constitutional rights, and the judicial process in Pakistan, making it a crucial reference for legal practitioners and scholars interested in property law, constitutional law, and the principles of judicial precedent. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.,
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH,
NASIM HASAN SHAH,
SHAFIUR RAHMAN
|
| Lawyers |
Ch. Khalilur Rehman, Senior Advocate,
Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record,
S. M. Zafar, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court,
S. Zahid Hussain, Advocate, Supreme Court,
Khan Muhammad Imtiaz Khan, Advocate-on-Record
|
| Petitioners |
|
| Respondents |
THE CHAIRMAN, ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE AND OTHERS
|
| Citations |
1987 SLD 855 = 1987 PLD 145
|
| Other Citations |
Abdul Hafiz v. Rehabilitation Commissioner P L D 1966 S -C 483,
Asma Jilani v. Government of the Punjab P L D 1972 S C 139,
Lloyds Bank Ltd. v. Dawson and others (1966) 3 All. E R 77
|
| Laws Involved |
Constitution of Pakistan (1973),
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),
Evidence Act (I of 1872)
|
| Sections |
185(3),
199,
189,
11,
41
|