Find a Lawyer

Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. K‑187 and K‑188 of 1983, decided on 15th May, 1983.

(On appeal from the order of the High Court of Sind at Karachi dated 13th February, 1983 on Miscellaneous Application No. 1837/82 in Constitution Petition No. D‑261 of 1980 and No. 1838/1982 in Constitution Petition No. D‑961 of 1981 respectively).

--‑Arts. 185(3) & 199‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. IX, r. 13‑ Writ petitions dismissed by High Court for failure of petitioner in appearance‑Application for setting aside ex parte order dismissed by High Court for want of sufficient cause preventing petitioner's counsel from appearing in Court on date of hearing‑Order passed by High Court in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction found to be in full accord with well‑settled principles‑Held, dismissal of petitioner's application not violative of any provision of law‑Leave refused.

Abdul Sattar Shaikh, Additional Advocate‑General Sind and Muzaffar Hassan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in both Petitions).

Faizanul Haq, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent (in both Petitions).

Date of hearing : 15th May, 1983.

By these two petitions leave to appeal is sought from the consolidated order of Sind Court dated 13‑2‑1983 dis missing petitioners' two applications under Order 1X, rule 13, C. P. C. for setting aside the ex parte judgment dated 31‑ ‑1982 passed in Constitution Petitions Nos. D‑t68 of 1980 and D‑961 of 1981. Learned Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court have held by the detailed reasons stated in the order that "they have not been satisfied that there was any sufficient cause which prevented the learned counsel for the petitioners" from appearing in Court on the date of hearing.

After hearing the learned Additional Advocate‑General in the light of the record before us we find that the order passed by the High Court in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction is in full accord with the well‑settled principles, and by dismissing petitioners' applications the High Court has not violated any provision of law.

Both the petitions are accordingly dismissed.

S.Q Leave refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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