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. 641 of 1974, decided on 22nd February, 1978.
(On appeal from the order dated 17th January, 1974, passed by the Lahore High Court in W. P. No. 414‑R of 1966).
‑‑Art. 185 (3) and Limitation Act (IX of 1908). Ss. 5 & 12‑Con donation of delay‑Petitioner applying for copy of writ petition within time after getting copy of impugned order and filing petition for limitation period‑Time spent, to preparation of copy of writ petition, held, cannot be tagged with time spent in preparation of copy of impugned order‑Delay not condoned in circumstances.
Abdul Majid Sheikh, Advocate Supreme Court assisted by Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Ch. Mushtaq Masood, Advocate Supreme Court with M. A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 22nd February, 1978.
The office note shows that the petition is barred by 96 days. The judgment of the High Court was delivered on 17th January, 1974. The application for grant of copy was submitted on 11th March, 1974 and the copy was ready for delivery on 23rd April, 1974. Thus 44 days we're taken in the preparation of the copy. However, the petition for leave to appeal was not filed in this Court until 5th August, 1974, 200 days after the passing of the judgment by the High Court. The petition, after deducting 60 days, within which it can be lodged, and 44 days spent in the preparation of the copy, is out of time by 96 days.
The learned counsel, in excuse of the delay has submitted that an application for obtaining a certified copy of the Writ Petition was submitted on 26th April, 1974, before the expiry of limitation for filing the petition for leave to appeal. The same was supplied on 3rd August, 1974 (Saturday) when the Registry was closed and the petition was filed on the next working day, viz. 5th August, 1974. According to the learned counsel the days spent in obtaining the certified copy of the Writ Petition are also liable to be excluded.
We find no force in this contention. The learned counsel was unable to show any law in support of his submission that the time taken in the preparation of the copy of the Writ Petition can be tagged on, With, the time spent in the preparation of the copy of the impugned judg ment‑ No ground for condonation of delay is, therefore, made out.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as barred by time.
Leave refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer