| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 1947 1989 SLD 1947 1989 SCMR 1826 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos.20 and 21 of 1982 (also C.P.LAs. Nos.262 and 263 of 1982), decision dated: 5-02-1989.(From judgment dated 2-3-1982 of Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in R.F.A. Nos.76 and 77 of 1980)
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, JAVID IQBAL AND USMAN ALI SHAH, JJ
Muhammad Saeed Akhtar, Advocate, Supreme Court, and Syed Inayat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants in both appeals and for
Respondents in both petitions. Raja Mahmood Akhtar, Advocate Supreme Court, and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-R
Civil Appeals Nos.20 and 21 of 1982 (also C.P.LAs. Nos.262 and 263 of 1982), decision dated: 5-02-1989.(From judgment dated 2-3-1982 of Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in R.F.A. Nos.76 and 77 of 1980)
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, JAVID IQBAL AND USMAN ALI SHAH, JJ
Muhammad Saeed Akhtar, Advocate, Supreme Court, and Syed Inayat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants in both appeals and for
Respondents in both petitions. Raja Mahmood Akhtar, Advocate Supreme Court, and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-R
SAJJAD HUSSAIN
VS
MUSARAT HUSSAIN SHAH and others
Law:
Section:
Supreme Court Rules, 1980---O.XIX, R.5--Grounds agitated before Supreme Court at argument stage were not raised at any earlier stage before any of the Courts--Effect-Appellant/petitioner would not, without the leave of the Supreme Court, rely at the hearing, on any grounds not specified in his petition and the concise statement. A. R. Khan v. P. N. Bogha through Legal Heir P L D 1987 S C 107; Haji Muhammad Asghar v. Malik Shah Muhammad Awan and another P L D 1986 S C 542; Abdul Wahab and others v. Habib Ali and others P L D 1969 Lah.365; Muhammad Hussain and others v. Walayat Shah and others P L D 1959 Lah.526; Zahirul Said Alvi v. Lachhmi Narayan A I R 1932 P C 251; Sourcndra Nath Mitra and others v. Tarubala Dasi A I R 1930 P C 158; Ramchandra Deo Garu v. Chaitana Sahu and others A I R 1920 PC 139; Chandoo v. Murlidhar and others A I R 1926 Oudh 311; 54 C J S para. 314; Halsbury's Laws of England, Fourth Edn., Vol. 37, para.382, Vol. 3, para. 118; Hakim Muhammad Buta and another v. Ilabib Alrmad and others P L D 1985 S C 153; Abdul Ghani v. Ghulam Sarwar P L D 1977 S C 102; Mst. Hamida Begum v. Mst. Murad Begum and others P L D 1975 S C: Q4 and Ghulam Hussain and others v. Khan Muhammad and others P I. D 1954 Lah. 655 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- ---O.XX111, R. 3 & S. 96--Judgment of Trial Court by consent of parties--Appeal against--Competency--Record showed that parties had prayed for adjournment of suit in order to effect a compromise, made statements conceding to the claim of the other and because of such consent, was given and decree passed-Without such compromise plaintiff would not have been prompted to deposit the amount asked for by the defendants as price of the land--Having thus entering into a compromise and prompting the plaintiff to deposit the amount, defendants could not challenge the same on the ground that the suit was barred by limitation--No appeal was thus competent from a decree passed by Court with consent of parties. Moulvi Zahirulsaid AM v. R.S. Seth Lachhmi Naryan A I R 1931 P C 107 ref. (c) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)- ---5. 14--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXIII, R.3--Constitution of Pakistan (1973),…
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