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 Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No: 192 of 1968, decided on 1st November 1968.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 16th February 1963, in Civil Revision No. 93 of 1968).
Art. 58 (3)‑Petition for Special Leave to Appeal‑Cannot be utilised as a lever for expediting judgment by Subordinate Court.
Muhammad Akram Raja, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by. Iqbal Ahmad Qureshi, Attorney for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : Ist November 1968.
This was a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of West Pakistan refusing to interfere in revision with an order of the Additional District Judge, Rawalpindi who refused to grant the suspension of an order appointing a receiver by the Civil Judge, Rawalpindi from which an appeal was filed in the District Court. The petitioners came up for revision to the High Court against this interlocutory order refusing to suspend the order appointing the receiver and also applied for a similar order of suspension to the High Court.
Both these matters were heard together but the High Court dismissed them both on the ground that under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure it had no jurisdiction to suspend the said order which was passed by the lower Court in the lawful exercise of its jurisdiction.
The petitioner has come up to this Court for special leave to appeal but it is now pointed out by his learned counsel that the appeal has been heard by the Additional District Judge of Rawalpindi and the judgment is awaited.
Whether the appeal succeeds or is lost, this petition in our view, has become infructuous, for, in either event no question of suspension of the order can arise. If the petitioner fails before the learned Additional District Judge, he will have to move the High Court against that order and then apply for suspension.
The learned counsel concedes this position but prays that this matter may be adjourned for a short while so that the Additional District Judge might deliver his judgment expeditiously. The petition for special leave to appeal cannot be utilized as a lever, for expediting a judgment by the Subordinate Court, particularly, since no reason has been given for apprehending that the judgment will be unduly delayed. In the circumstances, we refuse the prayer for adjournment and dismiss this petition as having become infructuous.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer