| Case ID |
e92612b5-58ee-44a7-928b-73875b922638 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
C.P. No. D-1509 of 1999 |
| Decision Date |
Sep 19, 2005 |
| Hearing Date |
Sep 19, 2005 |
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court dismissed the second constitutional petition based on the principle of maintainability. The court found that the petitioner had previously withdrawn a similar petition before the Lahore High Court without reserving the right to file a fresh petition. The court stated that there was no evidence to suggest that permission to file a fresh petition had been sought or granted. The dismissal was grounded on precedents indicating that withdrawal without such permission precludes subsequent filings on the same cause of action. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural norms and the need for clear requests when withdrawing petitions. The judgment highlighted that the petitioner had argued the case on its merits before withdrawing, thus undermining the claim of jurisdictional defect. As a result, the second petition was deemed not maintainable and was dismissed accordingly. |
| Summary |
In the case of Messrs PAKISTAN VINYL INDUSTRIES vs CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE, the Sindh High Court addressed critical questions of maintainability regarding constitutional petitions. The case stemmed from a prior petition that was withdrawn in the Lahore High Court, which raised significant concerns about the procedural integrity of filing subsequent petitions on the same matter. The court underscored the necessity for petitioners to explicitly reserve their rights when withdrawing a petition, as failure to do so could bar future claims. This case reinforces the application of procedural rules as outlined in the Constitution of Pakistan and the Civil Procedure Code, emphasizing the legal principle that withdrawal without permission limits the ability to refile. The court's decision also points to established case law, including the judgments in Sandal Bar's case and others, which serve to clarify the boundaries of judicial authority in such matters. The decision serves as a cautionary tale for legal practitioners about the importance of adhering to procedural formalities in the pursuit of justice. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
SABIHUDDIN AHMED, C.J.,
KHILJI ARIF HUSSAIN, J
|
| Lawyers |
Junaid Ghaffar for Petitioner,
Raja Muhammad Iqbal for Respondents Nos.1 and 2,
Faisal Arab, Standing Counsel for Respondent No. 3
|
| Petitioners |
Messrs PAKISTAN VINYL INDUSTRIES, LAHORE
|
| Respondents |
CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE through Secretary (Customs Tariff) and 2 others
|
| Citations |
2006 SLD 256,
2006 PTD 251
|
| Other Citations |
PLD 1997 SC 334,
PLD 1990 SC 596,
1970 SCMR 141,
PLD 2001 SC 325
|
| Laws Involved |
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973,
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
199,
O.XXIII,R.1
|