| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 1628 2007 SLD 1628 2007 PLD 560 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Review Petition No.46 of 2007 in Civil Appeal No.241 of 2005, decided on 4th April, 2007. (On review from the judgment dated 21-12-2006 passed by Supreme Court of Pakistan in C.A. No.241 of 2005).
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD AND RAJA FAYYAZ, AHMAD, JJ
S. Zafar Abbas Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court (with Petitioner in person). Nemo.
Civil Review Petition No.46 of 2007 in Civil Appeal No.241 of 2005, decided on 4th April, 2007. (On review from the judgment dated 21-12-2006 passed by Supreme Court of Pakistan in C.A. No.241 of 2005).
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD AND RAJA FAYYAZ, AHMAD, JJ
S. Zafar Abbas Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court (with Petitioner in person). Nemo.
Br. JEHANZAIB RAHIML
VS
Dr. SHAUKAT PERVEZ, Dr. HAMIDA RAHIM and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Supreme Court Rules, 1980--- ----O. XXVI, Rr. 6 & 8---Review---Petition drawn by associate of the counsel who appeared in appeal---Validity---Supreme Court entertained review petition and allowed advocate who assisted senior counsel in the main case as his associate to argue the review petition. Sh. Anwar-ul-Haq v. Miss Surraya Perveen and 2 others 1971 SCMR 171 fol. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art. 188---Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XXVI---Review of Supreme Court ---Limitation---Condonation of delay---Petition was filed with a delay of 51 days---Plea raised by petitioner was that Supreme Court in its discretionary jurisdiction had ample power to condone the delay for the purpose of decision of a case on merits---Validity---Delay of each day must be satisfactorily explained and ground on the basis of which condonation was sought must be recognizesd in law as a valid ground and sufficient cause for condonation of delay---Petitioner, due to his own negligence and choice, did not file review petition within time and after expiry of limitation on the basis of self-created ground of bias of Supreme Court Bench, had sought interference of Supreme Court in the consent in review jurisdiction---Scope of review being limited and unless very strong ground was shown for interference, the review was not to be entertained and delay of even one day could not be condoned without sufficient cause---Supreme Court did not find any valid ground or sufficient cause for condonation of delay of 51 days in filing review petition against consent ---Petition was dismissed. (c) Supreme Court Rules, 1980--- ---O. XXVI---Review of Supreme Court ---Principles---Petitioner's right to address the court---Validity---Case cannot be reopened on merits---Review petitioner. cannot himself address the court., if he was being represented by the counsel. ORDER MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.---This petition under Article 188 of the constitution read with Order XXVI, Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 has been filed seeking review of the judgment 'dated 21-12-20.06 rendered by this Court in Civil Appeal No.241 of 2005. 2. This review petition has been drawn and filed with theβ¦
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