Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Review Petition No. 10 of 1968, decided on 10th October 1968.
(On review from the judgment and order of this Court, dated the 14th December 1967, in Civil Appeal No. 60 of 1967).
---Art. 62‑Review‑Mere fact that litigant not satisfied with construction of provision of a particular law as given by Court‑No ground for review.
A review cannot be granted merely because one party or the other to the litigation is not satisfied with the decision of the Court and considers that the matter should be reheard or re argued. A review is not a substitute for an appeal. Therefore, the mere dissatisfaction of a party to the litigation is no ground for review although it might have been a ground for an appeal if an appeal lay from a decision of the Court. If reviews are permitted on such grounds, then there will never be an end to litigation.
Farrukh Amin, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Abdul Karim, Attorney for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : l0thpOctober 1968.
This is a petition for the review of a judgment delivered by the Full Court on the 14th December 1967, in Civil Appeal No. 60 of 1967.
The judgment was a fully considered judgment after hearing able arguments advanced by Mr. M. A. Zullah, a Senior Advocate of this Court, but review is now sought on the ground that this Court had misconstrued paragraph 4 of the Schedule to the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958. Even if, for arguments sake, it is accepted that this Court had erred in the construction of the said paragraph, that cannot furnish a ground for review. A review cannot be granted merely because one party or the other to the litigation is not satisfied with the decision of this Court and considers that the matter should be reheard or re‑argued. A review is nor a substitute for an appeal. Therefore, the mere dissatisfaction of a party to the litigation is no ground for review although it might have been a ground for an appeal if an appeal lay from a decision of this Court.
If reviews are permitted on such grounds, then there will never be an end to litigation. We are not satisfied that any ground for review of the considered judgment of this Court has been made out in this case. This petition is accordingly dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer