| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 867 2011 SLD 867 2011 PLD 235 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.M.As. Nos.2892 & 2878/2009 in C.R.P. Nos.75 & 76/2009 in Civil Appeal Nos. 1241. and 1242 of 2007 and Cr.O.P. No.122 of 2010 decided on 7-01-2011, hearing DATE : 15-12-2010.
MIAN SHAKIRULLAH, JAN, NASIR-UL-MULK AND MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JJ
Abdul Hafeez Prizada, Sr. Advocate Supreme Court, Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahar Khan Malik, Advocate-on-Record for Applicants/Petitioners (in C.R.Ps. Nos.75 and 76 of 2009). Wasim Sajjad, Sr. Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmo
C.M.As. Nos.2892 & 2878/2009 in C.R.P. Nos.75 & 76/2009 in Civil Appeal Nos. 1241. and 1242 of 2007 and Cr.O.P. No.122 of 2010 decided on 7-01-2011, hearing DATE : 15-12-2010.
MIAN SHAKIRULLAH, JAN, NASIR-UL-MULK AND MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JJ
Abdul Hafeez Prizada, Sr. Advocate Supreme Court, Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahar Khan Malik, Advocate-on-Record for Applicants/Petitioners (in C.R.Ps. Nos.75 and 76 of 2009). Wasim Sajjad, Sr. Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmo
PETROSIN CORPORATION PVT. LTD. and others--Applicants/s
VS
OGDC through Managing Director
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 114,O.XLVII,R.1
(a) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Arts. 185, 188, 184 & 199---Appeal---Review---Scope---Short order of court disposing of matter finally without supporting reasons would be treated as final order/ of court for all intents and purposes---Party aggrieved of such order could challenge same in appeal or review without waiting for detailed reasons and allowing limitation to pass by, and could reserve himself a right to add therein further grounds of attack after getting detailed ---Principles. The State v. Asif Adil and others 1997 SCMR 209; Criminal Review Petition No.9 of 2008 in Cr.M.As. No.181/2007 and 282/2006 in Cr.P. No.361-L/2004); Abdul Hameed Dogar v. Federation of Pakistan and others 2010 SCMR 312 and Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry v. President of Pakistan through Secretary and others PLD 2010 SC 61 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 114 & O. XLVII, R. 1---Review---New facts/evidence discovered after expiry of period of ?imitation prescribed for filing review petition---Delay, condonation of---Scope---Period of limitation for review would not be reckoned from date of such discovery---Such facts/evidence must have nexus to merits of decided case and/or issue involved therein, which if known/available earlier, then decision of case would have been otherwise---Such facts/evidence not having such nexus would not be considered as sufficient cause/reason for condonation of delay---Principles. Sindh High Court Bar Association's case PLD 2009 SC 879 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.---Civil Appeals Nos. 1241 and 1242 of 2007 came up for final hearing before this Court on 24-9-2008 when through a short order were dismissed in the following terms: "For the reasons to be recorded later, both these appeals are dismissed. However, the parties shall bear their own costs." 2. The applicants on 26-9-2008 applied for the copy of the short order in both the cases through an Application (No.5920 of 2008) which was prepared on 7-10-2008 and delivered to them on 8-10-2008, yet another Application (No.1166 of 2009) for obtaining the short order was moved on 23-2-2009, which was prepared and delivered to the…
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