Case Details

Citation(s)
1990 SLD 639 = 1990 MLD 1480
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 566 of 1990, decided on 19th March, 1990,
Presented By: Before Gul Zarin Kiani, J
Ch. Muhammad Abdullah for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.

AI-Haj Rana AMJAD HUSSAIN KHAN--Petitioner

VERSUS

Haji MUHAMMAD HANIF and another--Respondents

Law: Fatal Accidents Act, 1855

Section: 1 , 21 , 36

  Fatal Accidents Act (XIII of 1855)- ----S.1---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Arts. 21 & 36---Rash and negligent driving---Collision of bus and car resulting in injury to inmates of car---Car also smashed in accident---Plaintiff filing suit for recovery of damages assessed for the loss caused to his car---Limitation---Suit for damages for the loss caused to car, as a result of accident did not fall under Fatal Accidents Act---Article 21, Limitation Act, 1908, was thus not applicable which prescribed period of one year for such suits---Suit for damages for the loss caused to car was squarely covered by Art. 36, Limitation Act, 1908, which provided period of two years to plaintiff from the date of accident---Such BLit filed after expiry of two years from the date of accident was barred by limitation.   Damages--- ---- Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 36 & S.3---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, R.11 & S.115---Suit for damages for loss caused to car filed after two years of accident---Such suit being barred by limitation as provided under provision of Art. 36, Limitation Act, plaint was rejected by Trial Court, and order of rejection of plaint was upheld by Appellate Court---Held, suit clearly appeared to be barred by limitation; Courts below giving effect to it committed no illegality---Rather in terms of S.3, Limitation Act, where bar of limitation was apparent on the face of proceedings, Court was obliged to look into the question of its own accord---Judgments of Courts below thus did not suffer from any error of jurisdiction or violation of any procedural law existence whereof was essential for invocation of revisional jurisdiction---Revision dismissed in circumstances. Ch. Muhammad Abdullah for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. ORDER Facts set out in the plaint of the suit for recovery of damages, in brief are:- Car No. 4794/LEM belonged to plaintiff, Al-Haj Rana Amjad Hussain Khan. On 11-4-1985, it was driven by his driver Muhammad Sarfraz, when it met with an accident with bus No. 1255/LEM owned by Haji Muhammad Hanif and driven by Muhammad Ashraf. In the accident, not only the driver of the car but its four inmates also lost…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register