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 Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. K‑152 and K‑153 of 1968, decided on 7th January 1968.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 13th August 1968, is Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 279 and 280 of 1966).
--S. 6‑Provisions apply to suit or application and have no application to an appeal. Ihsanul Haq, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Noor Muhammad, Advocate with him) instructed by Ameer Ahmad Khan, Attorney for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 7th January 1968.
.‑This order will dispose of Civil Petitions Nos. K‑152 and K‑153 of 1968.
The predecessor‑in‑interest of the present petitioners Mr. Usman Azad filed two suits for specific performance of contracts. On his death on the 11th of September, 1964, the petitioners were brought on the record as his legal representatives. For the failure to comply with certain directions of the Court one of the suits out of which Petition No. 152 of 1968 arises was dismissed on the 22nd of November 1965 and the other suit out of which Petition No. 153 of 1968 arises was dismissed on 6‑12‑1965. In administration Suit No. 97 of 1965 the official assignee was appointed as receiver of the properties and claims of deceased Usman Azad. In December 1966, the official assignee filed two Letters Patent Appeals against the orders of dismissal of the two suits.
The appeals have been dismissed on the ground inter alia that they were hopelessly barred by limitation. The learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that as the orders of the dismissal were illegal inasmuch as for the directions given by the Court suits could not be dismissed and as two of the petitioners are still minors the appeals could not be dismissed on the ground of limitation. The learned counsel has failed to show us that the contention is supported by any authority. He has relied upon section 6 of the Limitation Act which applies to a suit or an application and has no application to an appeal. In our view this section cannot be availed of by a minor in connection with an appeal.
The petitions, therefore, are dismissed.
Leave refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer