Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No.650 of 1984, decided on 9th October, 1984.

---Rr. 15, 29 & 40(a)--Omission of Presiding Officer--Omission on part of Presiding Officer to enter name and number of electoral unit on ballot-paper, held, would not render ballot-paper invalid--Such omission or failure could not be said to have materially affected result of election. Ch.Mushtaq Ahmad Khan and Malik Amjad Pervaiz for Petitioner. Ch. Amin Hussain for Respondents. Date of hearing: 9th October, 1984.

The petitioner is a respondent in an appeal now pending before the learned Additional District Judge, Kasur. This appeal arose out of the orders passed by the Rent Controller. The petitioner is aggrieved of the orders passed by the learned Additional Distrit Judge on 18-2-1984 in which the appellant, before the Appellate Authority, was permitted to make up, the court-fee in appel which was deficient by Rs.35.50. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the C.P.C. not being applicable to the proceedings, the Additional District Judge was sitting in appeal, only, as a persona designata. He according to the learned counsel, had no authority to extend time for making up as the court--fee. The learned Additional District Judge permitted the making up of the court-fee and accepted the contention that a deficient court-fee was paid due to a misconception that court-fee was exempt on all appeals up to the value of Rs.25,000. A similar question arose in the case of Sh. Abdur Rashid and another v. Muhammad Jamil Siddique and 9 others 1984 C L C 1762 and it was held that under section 28 of A the Court Fees Act, 1870, such a direction can be given, if it is found fit, to do so. In the present case the permission granted by the Additional District Judge, therefore, was not without lawful authority. The writ petition is dismissed, the parties are, however, left to bear their own costs. S.A. Petition dismissed.