Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2772 2004 SLD 2772 2004 PLD 555
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No. 956 of 2002, decided on 19th March, 2004, DATE of hearing: 20th February, 2004
REHMAT HUSSAIN, JAFFERI, J
Qalander Bux Phulpoto for Petitioners. A.M. Mubeen Khan for
Respondent.

Malik ABDUL KADIR

VS

ATIQUE ARMED through Legal Heirs and another

Law:

Section:

(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----Preamble, S.29 & Art. 168---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 41--­Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, (XVII of 1979), S. 21---Limitation Act, 1908 was a general law which had laid down general rules of limitation applicable to all cases dealt with by said Act---Special Law was Law applicable to a particular subject as defined in S. 41 of P.P.C. and enacted for special cases which could also entertain special circumstances in conflict with general law laying down or applicable generally to all oases with which general law deals---Three different words were mentioned in S.29 of Limitation Act, 1908; viz. "Suit", "Appeal" and "Application" ---Said three words carried different meanings and connotations---" Suits" were different from "appeals" and vice versa, whereas suits and appeals would be quite different from Applications and vice versa---" Application" would be such which would not fall within the category of suit and appeal---When law makers had used three words in S.29 of Limitation Act, 1908, then it emphasized that implication of S.29 Limitation Act, 1908 would be applicable to three separate and different categories of subjects and rights accrued through filing of suit, appeal and application---For re-admitting art appeal, neither the suit nor the appeal was to be filed, but an application was required to be filed and that application would come within the meaning of word "Application" mentioned in S. 29 of Limitation Act, 1908---No time limit was fixed for filing an Application for readmission of appeal---No time for filing application for re-admission of appeal having been provided in Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, S.29 of Limitation Act, 1908 would not be applicable in such situation--­Period of 30 days for filing an application for re-admission of appeal dismissed for want of prosecution, had been provided under Art. 168 of Limitation Act, 1908. Yousif v. Fazal Kareem 1983 CLC-2219 and Kaushalya Rani v­. Gopal Singh AIR 1964 SC 260 ref. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Preamble & S. 417---Nature , and scope of Cr.P.C.---Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 was a general Law laying down procedure…
🔒
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