Case Details

Citation(s)
1998 SLG 944 1998 SLD 944 1998 SCMR 2586
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 259, 537 and 567 of 1998 in Civil Revision Petitions Nos. 12 to 17 of 1995, decision dated: 15-06-1998
SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN AND WAJIHUDDIN AHMED, JJ
Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Advocate Supreme Court, Naeem Bokhari, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record (for Applicants (in C.M.A. No. 259 of 1998) and for
Respondents (in C.M.A. No. 567 of 1998). Raza Kazim, Advocate Supreme Court

ROBERT AXFORD and others--Applicants

VS

ATTOCK OIL CO. and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Supreme Court Rules, 1980--O. XXXIII, R. 6---Inherent powers of Supreme Court---Six suits were instituted by the parties against each other in the lower Courts which became the subject-matter of appeals filed before the Supreme Court---Supreme Court by a consent order disposed of said appeals with the directions that said suits be decided by District Judge, within six months from the date of appearance of the parties; question that said suits be consolidated or not, be decided by the District Judge and parties to appear before the District Judge on the specified date--­Miscellaneous applications were filed by the parties before the Supreme Court praying that in the interest of justice, Supreme Court may order that civil suits be decided in accordance with the orders passed by Supreme Court by the Judge designated by name by the Supreme Court; that Supreme Court may be pleased to grant an extension in the time period to the applicants for leading their evidence in the said suits and may also direct the Courts below to hear and decide the direction suits and the matters arising out of the same as expeditiously as possible and that suits be transferred to a Senior Judge instead of the Judge designated by name by the Supreme Court---Delay in disposal of the suits had resulted on account of various proceedings, which had arisen from order passed from time to time by the Court against which a number of petitions in the nature of appeals, petitions etc. were instituted before- the High Court which were either pending or were disposed of and against such order civil petitions for leave to appeal were now pending before the Supreme Court---Supreme Court, in view of the nature of litigation, points of law involved in the proceedings and the status of the parties in the pending litigation granted further extension of time for disposal of the cases with a specific direction that the cases be disposed of by the same Judge who was assigned the cases by name. (b) Administration of justice---- Person as a Presiding Officer of a Court is required to maintain a balanced attitude in dealing with the grievances of the parties with regard to the conduct of the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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