Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 3036 2022 SLD 3036 2022 YLR 941
Balochistan High Court
Civil Revision No. 220 of 2010 and Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 1195 of 2021, decided on 30th August, 2021.
ABDULLAH BALOCH, J
Syed Manzoor Ahmed Shah for Appellants.

Master FAZALULLAH and another

VS

MUMMY and others

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 5

Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----S. 5---Maxim ‘vigilantibus non dorminentibus jura subveniunt’ (law helps vigilant not the indolent)---Applicability---Restoration of revision petition’ application for restoration was dismissed for non-prosecution on 14.11.2017’ contended that non-appearance was not deliberate/intentional; and that they were not intimated by their counsel about such dismissal---Held, that petitioners and their counsel remained absent on various dates of hearing continuously without any prior information/intimation; and they kept silent for a long lasting period of more than 3 years without any justifiable reason/sufficient cause---Present application for restoration did not contain any application for condonation of delay which showed the conduct and irresponsibility of petitioners--- Revision petition was dismissed in limine. Ghulam Qadir and others v. Sh. Abdul Wadood and others PLD 2016 SC 712 rel. ORDER ABDULLAH BALOCH, JUSTICE:---.--- This order disposes of C.M.A. No.1195 of 2021 filed by the applicants/petitioners for restoration of the Civil Revision Petition No.220 of 2010, which was dismissed in default and for non-prosecution on 14th November 2017. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants/petitioners contended that the above titled Civil Revision Petition was pending before this Court against the conflicting findings of the subordinate Courts and admitted for regular hearing, but due to non-appearance of petitioners and their counsel the same was dismissed in default and for non-prosecution. He further contended that whatsoever order has been passed by this Court the same was not in the knowledge of the applicants/petitioners and mere non- appearance on the part of the applicants is neither deliberate nor intentional, besides they were not intimated by their counsel about such dismissal of the petition; that the petitioners came to know one week ago, when the execution application was filed by the respondents before the executing Court for satisfaction of decree dated 20th February 2010; that valuable rights of the applicants/petitioners are involved, thus in the interest of justice the petition be restored to its original position. 3.…
🔒
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