Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--Arts.185 & 188---Appeal before Supreme Court---Dispute as to evacuee property---Supreme Court, after hearing the counsel for both the parties gained an impression as if each party was claiming different shops though they might have been only different units in a composite property and keeping such aspect of the case in view which developed during the arguments and also as a result of the examination of site plan, Supreme Court first asked the counsel for the respondents to shade exactly the portion being claimed by that side which he did, then the counsel of appellants was asked to do the same for the unit being claimed by him which he also did---Marking by respective counsel of ,the parties showed that both units were not only independent but there was a third portion lying in between the two and there remained no confusion nor any possibility of any mix up---Dispute having been resolved Supreme Court disposed of the appeal accordingly---After the in the case had been dictated which was not yet signed the counsel for the appellants made a request that he under serious mistake wrongly marked the portion as discussed in the dg already recorded and that in reality the appellants' claim was regarding a part of the portion of the property marked by the counsel of respondents---Supreme Court, in view of the rule of equity, reheard the matter and notwithstanding the earlier unsigned recorded opinion allowed the appeal with modification with clarification that rehearing was ordered on account of an innocent mistake made by the counsel of appellants on account of which neither he nor his clients deserved to be penalised by adverse results or effects; no technical impediment existed in the procedure adopted by the Court for rehearing of the appeal as the order passed on wrong conclusion of the counsel had not yet been a signed and if, however, any difficulty in understanding of such aspect of the case was found, the present order could also be treated as an order in review suo motu or otherwise. Barkat Ali v. Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner PLD 1991 SC 610 ref. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ: --In this appeal through…

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