Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 1465 2019 SLD 1465 2019 CLD 523
Sindh High Court
M.A. No. 57 of 2017, decision Dated: 04-06-2018. Hearing Dated: 05-03-2018.
MRS. KAUSAR SULTANA HUSSAIN, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Masood Anwar Ausaf
Respondent(s) by: Ahmed Ali Hussain No.1.

MUHAMMAD AMIR

VS

MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ AND ANOTHER

Law: Intellectual Property Organization of Pakistan Act, 2012

Section: 19

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 151,O.XXXIX,R.1,2

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 5,14

Intellectual Property Organization of Pakistan Ordinance (IV of 2012)--- ----S. 19---Limitation Act (IX of 1908) Ss. 14 & 5---Appeals from orders of Intellectual Property Tribunal---Limitation period for filing of appeal under S. 19 of the Intellectual Property Organization of Pakistan Ordinance, 2012---Condonation of delay---Mistake of counsel as ground for condonation of delay---Scope---Intellectual Property Organization of Pakistan Ordinance, 2012 was a special law and itself provided limitation of filing of appeal and as such, it prevailed over the general law of limitation---Filing of appeal mistakenly before a different forum on wrong advice of counsel would not extend period of limitation. Muhammad Tufail Danish v. Deputy Director FIA and another 1991 SCMR 1841; Khushi Muhammad through LRs and others v. Mst. Fazal Bibi and others PLD 2016 SC 872 and GBPCO and others v. Pakistan Television Corporation Ltd. and others PLD 2018 Lah. 399 rel. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MRS. KAUSAR SULTANA HUSSAIN, J.--- Caption Misc. Appeal has been preferred assailing the order dated 10.7.2017, passed by the learned Intellectual Property Tribunal Sindh, Karachi in Suit No. 05 of 2017, whereby disposed off an application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 read with section 151, C.P.C. The aforesaid appeal was presented on 18.08.2017 along with an application under sections 4 and 14 of the Limitation Act read with section 151, C.P.C. for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that delay in filing the appeal is purely bona fide and not deliberate as the appellant was misled by the proper course of remedy and assailed a wrong remedy. He has further submitted that on the very same day of impugned order, an order of releasing the goods and forfeiting the surety was also passed by the respondent No. 2, which was challenged by the appellant before Customs Appellate Tribunal on 20.7.2017 however, due to non-availability of bench of the Tribunal constrained to file Constitution Petition No. D-4793 of 2017 on 21.07.2017 before this Court. He has further argued that the appellant being misled and confused by the applicability of…
🔒
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