| Case ID |
fafea3ce-3f05-46a4-99c6-85fb4b63a607 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
K-18 of 1965 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 09, 1965 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
After hearing Mr. Ehsan-ul-Huq in support of the petition, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal. The Court clarified that the judgment delivered by a Single Judge of the High Court in a second appeal could be further appealed within the High Court under Letters Patent, provided a certificate was obtained from the Single Judge. The Court emphasized that petitions for special leave are typically entertained only against final judgments and orders of the High Court. However, in this special case, considering that counsel had been heard and leave had been granted, the Court proceeded to state the grounds for granting leave. Importantly, the Court specified that this case should not be regarded as a precedent. The key issue involved whether a letter written by Mr. Abdul Qadir Baig, an Advocate representing the debtor, constituted an acknowledgment of liability sufficient to extend the limitation period. Given the complexity of the questions and the reversal by the High Court, the Supreme Court deemed it appropriate to grant leave to appeal. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-18 of 1965, the Supreme Court of Pakistan deliberated on crucial aspects of Article 58 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1962). The case, cited as 1965 SLD 114 and 1965 PLD 466, addressed whether a letter penned by an Advocate on behalf of the debtor constituted an acknowledgment of liability sufficient to extend the limitation period. Presided over by Chief Justice A. R. Cornelius and Justice B. Z. Kaikaus, the Court examined the procedural nuances of granting leave to appeal, especially in instances where single judges of the High Court are involved in second appeals. Emphasizing the importance of final judgments and the necessity of obtaining proper certification under Letters Patent appeal, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal while clarifying that this decision should not serve as a legal precedent. This case underscores the intricate balance between procedural correctness and substantive justice within Pakistan's judicial framework, highlighting trending legal debates on the extension of limitation periods and the interpretation of legal acknowledgments by advocates. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Mr. Ehsan-ul-Huq,
Mr. Abdul Qadir Baig,
A. R. CORNELIUS,
B. Z. KAIKAUS
|
| Judges |
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J.,
B. Z. KAIKAUS, J
|
| Lawyers |
Mr. Ehsan-ul-Huq,
Mr. Abdul Qadir Baig
|
| Petitioners |
|
| Respondents |
|
| Citations |
1965 SLD 114,
1965 PLD 466
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Constitution of Pakistan (1962)
|
| Sections |
Art. 58
|