Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K‑163 of 1974, decided on 7th March 1975.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind Baluchistan, Karachi, dated 30‑5‑1974 in Constitution Petition No. 573 of 1974).

S. 5‑Condonation of delay‑Explanation not apprehensible Allegation that Branch Office of Court was closed on Friday not correct‑Registry not closing on Friday as alleged‑Application for condonation of delay made on 6‑3‑75 while petition for leave to appeal filed on 19‑8‑1974‑Valuable proprietary rights having vested in respondent, case, held, not fit for condonation,

S. M. Abbas, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

,This petition for leave to appeal is barred by time. The explanation given in the application for condonation of delay is that the petitioner was outside Karachi and his son handed over the Power of Attorney to the petitioner's counsel for "execution" and that "despite all care taken by the petitioner, the said Power of Attorney was made avail able to the Advocate‑on‑Record in the afternoon of l0th August 1974, but the said date being a Friday, the Branch Office of this Hon'ble Court was closed." It is difficult to make out proper sense out of the explanation but whatever it may mean, it does not absolve the petitioner of the delay in lodging the petition for leave to appeal. Moreover, the Registry of the Court at Karachi does not close on Friday as is alleged in the application. It is also significant that the application for condonation of delay was made on 6th of March 1975, while the belated petition for special leave to appeal was filed on 19th August 1974.

As valuable proprietary rights have come to be vested in the respondent we do not find it a fit case to condone the delay. The petition is dismissed as 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.