| Case ID |
2e283b95-89e0-4a1f-a879-a2e73471deff |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No. 30 of 1969 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 13, 1969 |
| Hearing Date |
Mar 26, 1969 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled on the powers of the High Court in reviewing its own orders made in the exercise of writ jurisdiction. The Court clarified that the High Court possesses the authority to correct errors that are apparent on the face of the record and can review its orders under Section 114 of the Civil Procedure Code. The Court emphasized that the right to seek a review is a substantive right and not merely procedural, which must be specifically provided by law. The ruling delineated the civil jurisdiction of the High Court and confirmed that proceedings under Article 98 of the Constitution relating to civil matters are indeed civil proceedings governed by the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. The decision highlighted the evolution of legal standards regarding the review of High Court decisions and reinforced the importance of maintaining legal clarity in civil procedures. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of 'HUSSAIN BAKHSH vs. SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, RAWALPINDI', the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed critical issues regarding the review powers of the High Court under the Constitution of Pakistan (1962) and the Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908). The case arose from a civil appeal concerning the High Court's authority to revisit its decisions. The Supreme Court determined that the High Court retains the ability to correct its errors and conduct reviews of its orders within the framework of civil jurisdiction. The ruling clarified that the right to review is substantive, requiring statutory provision, and outlined the nature of civil proceedings, asserting that they continue to be governed by the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. This case is significant for its interpretation of civil rights and the jurisdictional boundaries of the High Court, thereby reinforcing legal standards in Pakistan's judicial system. Keywords such as 'review powers of High Court', 'civil proceedings', and 'jurisdictional authority' are pertinent in discussions surrounding this case. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore,
Bar Association, High Court, Lahore
|
| Judges |
HAMOOD-UR-RAHMAN, C.J.,
MUHAMMAD YAQOOB ALI,
SAJJAD AHMAD,
ABDUS SATTAR,
M. R. KHAN
|
| Lawyers |
S. M. Akhtar Mir, Advocate,
Iftikhar Ahmad Syed, Advocate,
Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, Senior Advocate,
Raja Said Akbar, Advocate-General West Pakistan
|
| Petitioners |
HUSSAIN BAKHSH
|
| Respondents |
others,
SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, RAWALPINDI
|
| Citations |
1970 SLD 32,
1970 PLD 1
|
| Other Citations |
Jalal Din v. Muhammad Akram Khan P L D 1963 Lah. 596,
Muhammad Ishaq v. Abdul Aziz P L D 1965 Lah. 590,
National Telephone Company Ltd. v. Postmaster-General 1913 A C 546,
Mumtaz Khan v. Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner P L D 1966 S C 276,
Ahmad Khan v. Chief Justice and Judges of the High Court of West Pakistan P L D 1968 S C 171,
Sandback Charity Trustees v. North Staffordshire Railway Co. h (1877) 3 Q B D 1,
Narsingdas Tansukdas v. Choge Mull I L R 2 Cal. 93,
Sabitri Thakurani v. Savi A I R 1921 P C 80,
Stroud's Judicial Dictionary and Bradlough v. Clarks 8 A C 354
|
| Laws Involved |
Constitution of Pakistan (1962),
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
Art. 98,
S. 114,
O. XLVII, r. 1
|