| Case ID |
3cf0cb8c-7283-4a36-94eb-d2eb39ff1ac1 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
TA. No. 684-C of 1992 |
| Decision Date |
Nov 25, 1992 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court dismissed the transfer application filed by Sameer Ehsan Ullah Makhzan and three others, deeming it frivolous and without any lawful basis. The court emphasized that judicial officers must be protected against baseless harassment and that mere dissatisfaction with judicial orders does not constitute valid grounds for transferring a case. The petitioners were also ordered to bear special costs of Rs.1,000 for filing the frivolous petition. Thus, the transfer application was dismissed, reinforcing the integrity and independence of the judiciary. |
| Summary |
In the case TA. No. 684-C of 1992, adjudicated by the Lahore High Court on November 25, 1992, the court addressed significant concerns regarding the administration of justice and the protection of judicial officers from frivolous and baseless litigation. The petitioners, led by Sameer Ehsan Ullah Makhzan and three others, sought the transfer of six consolidated suits from the Court of Civil Judge Mr. Ghaffar Jalil. They invoked Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, V of 1908, arguing that the current judge was dismissing stay applications and consolidating suits in a manner that could potentially prejudice their cases.
The petitioners presented several grounds for the transfer, including allegations that the Civil Judge was dismissing stay applications unjustly, consolidating only certain suits, and that the respondents held influential positions which could lead to biased judicial decisions. They further contended that the Civil Judge was handling cases hastily, thereby jeopardizing the fairness of their trials.
However, the Lahore High Court meticulously examined these claims and found them to be unfounded and lacking in legal merit. The court underscored the principle that justice must not only be done but must also appear to be done, highlighting that the mere suspicion or apprehension of bias does not constitute valid grounds for transferring a case. The court emphasized the importance of protecting judicial officers from unwarranted harassment and ensuring their ability to administer justice without fear or favor.
The court also addressed the petitioners' arguments regarding the influence of the respondents and the alleged intention to manipulate judicial outcomes through connections with government officials. The court found these allegations to be speculative and lacking concrete evidence. It reiterated that any dissatisfaction with judicial orders should be addressed through appropriate higher forums and legal channels rather than through baseless transfer petitions.
Furthermore, the court pointed out that the Civil Judge had been diligently handling the cases in accordance with directives from the High Court, aiming for expeditious and impartial adjudication. The petitioners' inability to provide substantial grounds for transferring the suits led the court to dismiss the transfer application, labeling it as frivolous in nature. Additionally, the court imposed a cost of Rs.1,000 on the petitioners for filing the unwarranted petition, thereby discouraging the misuse of judicial processes.
This decision serves as a pivotal affirmation of the autonomy and integrity of the judiciary, reinforcing that judicial officers must be shielded from frivolous litigations that seek to undermine their authority and the efficient administration of justice. It underscores the necessity for litigants to approach higher judicial forums with valid and substantial grievances rather than resorting to baseless transfer applications. By dismissing the petitioners' application and imposing costs, the Lahore High Court reinforced the importance of maintaining public confidence in the judicial system and upholding the rule of law.
The case also highlights the critical role of Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code in governing the transfer of cases between courts, ensuring that such transfers are based on genuine and reasonable grounds. The court's reliance on this legal framework demonstrates the judiciary's commitment to fair trial standards and the efficient resolution of disputes without unnecessary delays or procedural manipulations.
In conclusion, TA. No. 684-C of 1992 stands as a testament to the Lahore High Court's dedication to safeguarding the integrity of the judicial process, ensuring that justice is administered fairly and without undue influence. The dismissal of the transfer application not only protected the rights and responsibilities of the presiding judge but also reinforced the broader principles of judicial independence and accountability, essential for a robust and trustworthy legal system. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Lahore High Court,
Sameer Ehsan Ullah Makhzan,
Muhammad Asif Zaman,
Ghaffar Jalil,
Ch. Muhammad Aslam Sandhu
|
| Judges |
CIT. MUSHTAQ AHMAD KHAN, J
|
| Lawyers |
Ch. Muhammad Aslam Sandhu
|
| Petitioners |
,
Sameer Ehsan Ullah Makhzan
|
| Respondents |
,
Muhammad Asif Zaman
|
| Citations |
1993 SLD 1196 = 1993 PLD 554
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code, V of 1908
|
| Sections |
24
|