Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 35‑P of 1970, decided on 14th December 1973.

(On appeal from the order of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, dated 3‑8‑72 in Writ Petition No. 69/72).

--‑‑S. 5‑Condonation of delay‑Petitioner unnecessarily wasting time on frivolous and wholly misconceived petitions in High Court‑Held: Valuable right having accrued to other side by lapse of time, he could not be lightly deprived of such right in circumstances‑Delay not condoned.

Ghazanfar Ali Shah, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Iftikharuddin Ahmed, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 14th December 1973.

This petition by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan through the Secretary Ministry of Communications Government of Pakistan is barred by 108 days. An application has however been filed for the condonation of tie delay on the ground that after the writ filed by the petitioner was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the Peshawar High Court on the 3rd of August, 1972 the petitioner applied to the High Court for a certificate presumably under sections 109 and 110 read with Order XLIV, rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, without noticing that under clause 2(a) of Article 186 of the Interim Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan the High Court could only certify the case if it involved a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the said Constitution and on no other ground could a certificate of fitness be granted by the High Court.

In the petition for a certificate, no such ground was made out, but all that was stated was that a very important question of law and facts arose which materially affected the rights of the petitioner. It was also not noticed that under section 111 of the Civil Procedure Code no appeal lay to this Court from the decree or order of one Judge of the High Court.

The application for the certificate was therefore, hopelessly misconceived. Nevertheless, it has been contended in the petition for the condonation of delay that the period spent in pursuing this application in the High Court which was refused on the 1st of December 1972 should be condoned and the petition entertained.

A valuable right accrues to the other side by the lapse of time and he cannot be lightly deprived of this right merely on the ground that the other side has unnecessarily wasted time on frivolous and wholly misconceived petitions in the High Court. There was no justification at all for the application for the certificate of fitness which was filed in the High Court. It was neither competent under the Interim Constitution nor under the Civil Procedure Code and it was rightly dismissed by the High Court on that ground.

Ignorance of law can never be an excuse sufficient to defeat another person's right. We cannot, therefore accede to the request made for the condonation of the delay. It is refused and the petition is dismissed as being hopelessly barred by time.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.