Law:

Section:

(a) Supreme Court Rule, 1980-----O. XXVI--Review--Petitioner claiming that there was an error of law on face of in so far as Supreme Court, held, that High Court had no power to record additional evidence in revsional jurisdiction-­Nothing existing in Supreme Court to hold that High Court had no power to record additional evidence although it was held that in circumstances of case and for reasons mentioned in High Court was not justified to record additional evidence--Review petitioner attempting to reargue appeal--Petition for review, held, was without merit and dismissed. (b) Jurisdiction-----Justification for exercise of power or jurisdiction, held, was clearly different from having no power or jurisdiction to dos thing. (c) Review by Supreme Court----A n attempt to reargue appeal, held, not permissible at review stage. S. M. Zaffar, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, Khan Bahadur Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Jalaluddin Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 25th February, 1986. ORDER ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, J.--The main contention in support of this review petition is that there is an error of law on the face of the judgment in…

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