Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 5

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 201

Law: Registration Act, 1908

Section: 17

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)-------S. 5---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Revision---Provision of S.5, Limitation Act, 1908 does not apply to revision petitions filed beyond time. Allah Dino and another v. Muhammad Shah and others 2001 SCMR 286 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---S. 115---Suo motu revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Courts below, in the present case, had fallen into material error while decreeing the declaratory suit and granting the permanent injunction and if such error in fact existed and was not rectified that would result -in grave miscarriage of justice---Suo motu revisional jurisdiction which was available to High Court must be exercised to ensure that the ends of justice were met---Failure to do so by the High Court would constitute abdication of the important supervisory function with which the High Court was invested---High Court, was to examine the matter in detail and, if material error in the exercise of jurisdiction by the Courts below was established to correct such error in exercise of its suo motu revisional jurisdiction. Haji Rehmdil v. The Province of Balochistan and another 1999 .SCMR 1060 ref (c) Administration of justice- ----Adjournments, grant of---Decision in cases should not be delayed simply because a party chooses to assail an interlocutory order before a higher forum or as in the present case, has merely formed an intention of doing so---If adjournments, as a rule, are allowed in every case where counsel intends to impugn an interlocutory order, contentious matters would never be decided which state of affairs cannot be allowed---Postponing the hearing of case by the High Court, in such circumstances, will be binding precedent for subordinate Courts which, potentially, can bring their working to stand still---Delay in adjudication of cases especially when it is without reasons, would itself amount to denial of justice--Frequent adjournments without cause, result in harmful consequences---High Court desired that advocates individually, and their professional bodies collectively, recognize the harmful consequences of unjustified delays and do something to address the problem. (d)…

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