Find a Lawyer

TARIQ SALEEM versus SOHAIL SHAKIL FARUQI

XXO XXII, Rr 3 & 4 & O VII, R 26 - Demarcation Act (IX of 2908), Arts 176 and 177 and Section 5 - Appeal - Death of a party Legal legacy executed - Limitation - Delay of termination - Applicable The provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1908 for application under O XXII, Rr 3 & 4, the provisions of the sections of the CPC C Scope Limitation Act, 1908, were applied on application under O XXII, Rr 3 & 4. The applicant's legal heirs were to be enforced within ninety days, which would set a period from the date of death of the deceased, according to the list given by the court along with the deceased by the deceased's own legal representative Can apply - The deceased was not a co-defendant in the case and no list was given under O VII, R 26, the legal representative of the deceased victims of the CPC was not aware of the possibility of an existing appeal - unless the legal heirs knew Their deceased father takes action in a particular court. In this case they will not be able to apply for a party to it - the deceased's legal heirs were shown the reason for not applying for execution within a stipulated period. The legal representatives of the deceased were instructed. To act as an appellant in it. Appeal - Appellant was instructed to file the amended title within a week. he is permitted to apply for legality as a legal heritage, [pp. 385, 386] B, C, D, E & F.

P L D 2017 Sindh 381 

Before Irfan Saadat Khan and Zafar Ahmed Rajput, JJ

TARIQ SALEEM and others—Applicants

versus

SOHAIL SHAKIL FARUQI and others—Respondents

H.C.A. No. 198 of 2007, C.M.As. Nos. 520 and 521 of 2013, decided on 29th April, 2016.

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)—

—O. XXII, Rr.3 & 4 & O. VII, R. 26—limitation Act (IX of 2908), Arts. 176 & 177 & S. 5—Appeal—Death of a party—Impleadment of legal heirs—Limitation—Condonation of delay—Applicability of S. 5 of Limitation Act, 1908 to the application under O.XXII, Rr. 3 & 4, C.P.C.—Scope—Provisions of S.S of Limitation Act, 1908 were applicable to the application under O.XXII, Rr.3 & 4, C.P.C— Application for impleadment of legal heirs of deceased was to be made within ninety days which period would be computed from the date of death of deceased—Court might implead legal representatives of the deceased suo motu according to the list given by the plaintiff accompanied with the plaint—Deceased was not co-plaintiff in the suit and no list was given under O.VII, R.26, C.P.C.—Legal representatives of deceased were not aware of pendency of present appeal—Unless legal heirs were aware that their deceased predecessor had brought action in a particular court they would not be able to make an application for making them party in the matter—Sufficient cause had been shown for not making the application for impleadment by the legal heirs of the deceased within prescribed period—Legal representatives of the deceased were directed to be impleaded as appellant in the appeal—Appellant was directed to file amended title within one week thereof—Application for impleadment as legal heirs was allowed in circumstances, [pp. 385, 386] B, C, D, E & F

Shabbir Ahmed and another v. Nazir Ahmed and others 2000 MLD 702 ref.

(b) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)—

—Art. 176—Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXII, R. 3(2)— Death of a party—Impleadment of legal heirs—Limitation, commencement of—Legal heirs of deceased could be impleaded within

ninety days which period would be computed from the date of death of deceased• [p. 386] C

(c) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)—

—Ss. 5 & 29(2)—Limitation—Condonation of delay—Scope—If statute governing the proceedings did not prescribe period of limitation then proceedings instituted thereunder should be controlled by the Limitation Act, 1908 as a whole—Where law under which proceedings had been launched prescribed itself a period of limitation then benefit of S. 5 of Limitation Act, 1908 could not be availed unless it had been made applicable as per S.29(2) of Limitation Act, 1908. [p. 385] A

Adnan I, Chaudhry for Applicants.

Badar Alam for Respondents Nos. 1 & 3 to 5.

Date of hearing: 15th April, 2016.

best advocate from Kamra lawyer