Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 2214 2012 SLD 2214 2012 CLD 517
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeals Nos.176, 177 and 178 of 2009, decision dated: 12-10-2011.
MUSHIR ALAM, C.J. AND NISAR AHMED SHAIKH, J
Umer Hayat Sandhu for Appellant. Imran Khan for
Respondent.

FEROZE ABDUL KARIM

VS

MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. through Managing Director

Law:

Section:

(a) Tort-------Malicious prosecution--- Suit for compensation---Limitation---Rejection of plaint--- Suit for damages against alleged wrongful dismissal was filed after more than 9 years from the said dismissal order along with application under S.5 of Limitation Act, 1908 for condonation of delay---Grounds disclosed by the plaintiff for condonation of said inordinate delay in filing suit were far from satisfactory---Applications for condonation of delay were dismissed, in circumstances---Appeals, otherwise being barred by time, were dismissed, in circumstances. Muhammad Yousuf v. Ghayyur Hussain Shah 1993 SCMR 1185 distinguished. (b) Interpretation of statutes--- ----Where special provision was applicable, general provision, would not apply. ORDER All three appeals arise out of common order passed by learned Single Judge in Suits Nos.401, 402 and 419 of 2007, whereby an application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. on similar facts and grounds was allowed and the suits were dismissed being barred by Article 23 of the Limitation Act. Along with the appeal an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of 7 days delay in filing of the appeals was also moved by the appellant Feroz A. Karim (H.C.A. No.176 of 2009) on the ground that appellant was heart patient and was treated and admitted to hospital and could not instruct the counsel to pursue the appeal. The appellant Yousuf Dada in H.C.A. No.177 of 2009, sought condonation on the ground that he had gone to Multan and he had no idea as to necessity to contact his advocate. The appellant Yaseen in H.C.A. No.178 of 2009, sought condonation on the ground that he was attending his sister who was hospitalized. Learned counsel for the respondent has taken serious exceptions to the grounds taken by each of the appellant to seek condonation of delay as well as on merits. Mr. Umer Hayat Sandhu, learned counsel for the appellant contends that since the suit has arisen out of wrongful dismissal dated 16-4-1997 and damages were claimed for malicious prosecution, in which the appellants were acquitted on 30-11-2005. Suits were filed on 23-12-2006 along with an application under section 5 of the Limitation…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492