| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 1322 2026 SLD 1322 = 2026 SCP 17 = 2026 PLD 291 |
CUO NO.1 OF 2025 IN CPLA NO.NIL OF 2025 (Office objection)
PRESENT: MR. JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI, CJ MR. JUSTICE MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR MR. JUSTICE MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI
Rana Abid Nazir, ASC
M/s Moon Dental Clinic, Islamabad & another …Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
Additional District Judge, Islamabad-West & another .... Respondent
Law:
Section: 185(1),185(2),185(3),175F(1),175F(1)(c),199
Summary
The Supreme Court, led by CJ Yahya Afridi, overruled an office objection to the maintainability of a Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal against a High Court judgment under Article 199 in a rent matter. The objection relied on Article 175F(1)(c), introduced by the 27th Amendment, claiming High Courts as the final forum for rent cases. The Court held that the proviso to Article 175F(1)(c) excludes rent matters from the Federal Constitutional Court's jurisdiction, meaning they do not fall under Article 175F(1) and thus are not barred by the proviso to Article 185(3), allowing appeals to the Supreme Court with leave.
Core Points
- Office objected to petition's maintainability, arguing Article 175F(1)(c) makes High Court final in rent matters under Article 199, excluding Supreme Court appeals.
- Article 185(1) and (3) grant Supreme Court general appellate jurisdiction from High Court judgments, subject to Article 175F(1); proviso to 185(3) bars appeals only in cases under 175F(1).
- Proviso to Article 175F(1)(c) expressly excludes rent (and family except guardianship) matters from Federal Constitutional Court's jurisdiction.
- As a "true proviso," the exclusion carves rent matters out of Article 175F(1)(c)'s scope, so they are not cases "to which clause (1) of Article 175F applies."
- Rent matters thus remain appealable to Supreme Court under Article 185(3) with leave; objection overruled, petition maintainable.
Relevant Laws and Sections
| Article/Provision | Key Content | Context in Order |
|---|---|---|
| Article 185(1) | Supreme Court jurisdiction to hear appeals from High Court judgments, decrees, final orders, or sentences, subject to Article 185 and 175F. | General appellate jurisdiction foundation. |
| Article 185(2) | Specifies appeals as of right in certain cases (e.g., death sentences, contempt, high-value disputes). | Not directly applicable here (petition under 185(3)). |
| Article 185(3) | Appeals in other High Court cases lie only with Supreme Court leave; proviso: no appeal in cases to which Article 175F(1) applies. | Core provision; bar applies only to 175F(1) cases, excluding rent matters. |
| Article 175F(1) | Federal Constitutional Court appellate jurisdiction from High Courts in specified cases. | Sets jurisdiction excluded from Supreme Court via 185(3) proviso. |
| Article 175F(1)(c) | Appeals from High Court Article 199 orders only with leave; proviso: no appeal in rent/family (except guardianship) cases. | Exclusion of rent matters removes them from 175F(1) scope. |
| Article 199 | High Court's constitutional writ jurisdiction. | Basis of impugned judgment in rent matter. |
| 27th Constitutional Amendment | Inserted Article 175F, limiting appeals in certain High Court matters. | Triggered office objection; interpreted as not barring Supreme Court in excluded cases. |
ORDER