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.
Review Petition No. 63‑R of 1980. decided on 21st March, 1982.
(On review from the order of this Court dated 9‑4‑1980 passed in Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1979).
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--‑
-----Art.
188 read with Supreme Court Rules, O. XXVI and Limitation Act (IV of 1908), S. 5‑Review‑Limitation‑Condonation of delay Petitioner coming to know of disposal of appeal on 23‑5‑1980, rushing to principal seat of Court, obtaining copy on 24‑5‑1980 but actually moving application for review on 23‑6‑1980 ‑No explanation offered for delay of each day knowing disposal of appeal and after period of limitation expired‑No sufficient cause for condonation of delay having been made out‑Petition for review dismissed.‑[Review by Supreme Court].
Zaheer‑ud‑Din Macci for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 21st March, 1982.
M. S. H. QURESHI, J.‑
The petitioner by this petition seeks review of the order of this Court dated 9‑4‑1980, whereby his Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1979 had been dismissed as being without merit. The petition, having been filed on 23‑6‑1980, is some 45 days beyond the limitation period. The petitioner has filed an application seeking condonation of the delay. His case is that the appeal had only partly been argued on 9‑4‑1980 when the Court time had been over and that no judgment bad been announced, nor was also some of the record before the Court. He had, therefore, gone awe under 'the genuine apprehension that the appeal was fixed for re‑arguments".
However, as appears from the recitals in his application, he had come to know on 23‑5‑1980 of the disposal of the appeal and had rushed to Rawalpindi where he had obtained copy on 24‑5‑1980, but there is no explanation for the delay made thereafter until 23‑6‑1980 when the petition was actually moved. Since be is to account for the delay of each and every day after he had come to know of the disposal of his appeal and after the period of limitation had been over, his application fails to provide sufficient and proper cause for condoning the delay. The review petition is, therefore, dismissed as time- barred.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer