| Case ID |
253a7680-7da6-4553-8838-8087a71e5411 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Writ Petition No. 1090 of 2018 |
| Decision Date |
Sep 24, 2018 |
| Hearing Date |
Sep 19, 2018 |
| Decision |
The Islamabad High Court, through Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, dismissed Writ Petition No. 1090 of 2018, affirming the lower courts' decisions. The court held that the petitioner, Major Muhammad Nauman, who was proceeded against ex parte, failed to provide a valid reason for his absence during the proceedings. The court clarified that while there is a limitation period for setting aside ex parte decrees, no such period is specified for recalling orders where a party is proceeded against ex parte. The court also addressed issues related to the arbitration award and emphasized that the Civil Court must examine the award for any apparent illegality before making it a rule of court. The petitioner's failure to file objections to the arbitration award within the stipulated time was noted as a critical factor in the decision. |
| Summary |
In Writ Petition No. 1090 of 2018, the Islamabad High Court addressed the procedural issues surrounding an arbitration award and the implications of being proceeded against ex parte. The petitioner, Major Muhammad Nauman, contested the decisions of lower courts that dismissed his applications to set aside orders where he was not present during hearings. The High Court emphasized the importance of timely actions in legal proceedings, particularly regarding arbitration, and clarified the legal framework regarding ex parte orders under the Civil Procedure Code and the Arbitration Act. The ruling serves as a critical reference for understanding procedural rights in civil litigation and arbitration and highlights the necessity for parties to engage actively in their cases to avoid unfavorable outcomes. This case reiterates the judicial expectations for parties to adhere to procedural rules and the consequences of negligence in legal representation. Keywords such as 'Islamabad High Court', 'Civil Procedure Code', 'Arbitration Act', 'ex parte', and 'legal representation' are essential for SEO optimization, ensuring the content is easily discoverable and relevant. |
| Court |
Islamabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb
|
| Lawyers |
Ms. Shireen Imran,
Izzat Khan
|
| Petitioners |
Major Muhammad Nauman
|
| Respondents |
Another,
Usman Habib
|
| Citations |
2019 SLD 1390,
2019 PLD 255
|
| Other Citations |
Hashim Khan v. National Bank of Pakistan 1992 SCMR 707,
Police Department v. Javid Israr 1992 SCMR 1009,
Tribal Friends Co v. Province of Balochistan 2002 SCMR 1903,
M.A. Jalil v. Group Capt. (Retd.) Salah-ud-Din Khan 1983 CLC 1685,
Province of Punjab, Housing and Physical Planning Department, Lahore PLD 1984 Lah. 515,
Awan Industries Ltd. v. The Executive Engineer, Lined Channel Division 1992 SCMR 65,
Pakistan through General Manager, Pakistan Railway v. Messrs Q.M.R. Expert Consultants PLD 1990 SC 800,
Ameen General Enterprises v. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government PLD 2010 SC(AJ&K) 1,
National Logistic Cell (NLC) v. Hakas (Pvt). Ltd. 2010 YLR 1448,
Rashida Begum v. Ch. Muhammad Anwar PLD 2003 Lah. 522,
Muhammad Swaleh v. Messrs United Grain and Fodder Agencies PLD 1964 SC 97,
Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education v. Azam Ali Khan 2017 YLR 906,
Mst. Bhagay v. Mst. Fatima Bibi PLD 2004 Lah. 12,
Town Municipal Administration v. Rifat Hussain 2003 CLC 1370,
Oil and Gas Development Corporation v. Clough Engineering Limited 2003 YLR 353,
Mst. Iqbal Bibi v. Allah Yar 2004 YLR 1279,
Kiran Arif Mian v. Kinza Khalid PLD 2008 Isl. 11,
Hafez Ahmad v. Civil Judge, Lahore PLD 2012 SC 44
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),
Arbitration Act, 1940,
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973,
Limitation Act, 1908
|
| Sections |
115,
O. IX, R. 6,
O. IX, R. 13,
17,
20,
30,
31,
39,
199,
158,
181
|