| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 108 2023 SLD 108 2023 SCMR 233 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos. 3509 and 1494-K of 2021, decided on 1st December, 2022. Date of hearing: 1st December, 2022. (Against judgments Dated 27.05.2021 and 02.06.2021 passed by the High Court of Sindh Bench at Sukkur in Const. Ps. Nos. D-1110 of 2020, D-15
SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, AYESHA A. MALIK AND ATHAR MINALLAH, JJ
Hassan Rasheed Qamar, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Haseeb Jamali, Advocate Supreme Court (through video link, Karachi) for Petitioners. Rai Muhammad Nawaz Khan Kharal, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents.
Civil Petitions Nos. 3509 and 1494-K of 2021, decided on 1st December, 2022. Date of hearing: 1st December, 2022. (Against judgments Dated 27.05.2021 and 02.06.2021 passed by the High Court of Sindh Bench at Sukkur in Const. Ps. Nos. D-1110 of 2020, D-15
SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, AYESHA A. MALIK AND ATHAR MINALLAH, JJ
Hassan Rasheed Qamar, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Haseeb Jamali, Advocate Supreme Court (through video link, Karachi) for Petitioners. Rai Muhammad Nawaz Khan Kharal, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents.
KANWAR ARIF ALI KHAN and another
VS
DANISH ALI and others
Law:
Section:
Supreme Court Rules, 1980--- ----O. XXXIII, R. 7---Inherent powers of the Supreme Court---Scope---Application by a person who is not a party in the proceedings before the High Court---Person who is not a party to a suit or a proceeding in the court below (the Supreme Court) should file a separate application for obtaining leave from the appellate court to appeal the , decree or order of which he feels aggrieved, along with the memorandum of appeal filed by him. Longstanding and consistent practice of the Supreme Court is that any person who challenges the of the High Court through a petition or appeal, but has not been a party to the proceedings before the High Court, first prefers a separate application seeking leave of the Court to maintain such a petition or appeal. The wisdom behind the said practice is; firstly, that it ensures that the Court is put on notice that the petitioner was not a party in the proceedings before the High Court; and secondly, the petitioner, before addressing the merits of the case, has to establish before the Court that he is aggrieved of the impugned . Once these conditions are met and the application is allowed, by the Court, the petition or appeal is duly numbered and fixed to be heard on merits. Such practice has been tacitly a part of Order XXXIII, Rule 7 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 for a long time and promotes transparency, openness and good judicial governance. Supreme Court endorsed such practice and reiterated the principle to such effect laid down in the case of H. M. Saya, Co. v. Wazir Ali Industries Ltd. PLD 1969 SC 65. H. M. Saya, Co. v. Wazir Ali Industries Ltd. PLD 1969 SC 65 ref. ORDER SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, J.--- Civil Petition No.3509 of 2021: The main case has been decided by the Sindh High Court vide order dated 02.06.2021, therefore, the instant matter arising out of an interim order has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly. Civil Petition No.1494-K of 2021: We have noticed that the petitioner was not a party before the High Court as his application for impleadment was dismissed vide order dated 27.5.2021 and subsequently the main petition was decided on 02.6.2021, which has been challenged…
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