Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Trusted direct lawyer access
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.

☎ Phone and WhatsApp access ⚖ Verified lawyer directory 🔒 Secure payment
⚡ Connect with 10 Lawyers for Rs 1,000
Pay once. Open contact numbers for lawyers matching your legal need.

ABDUL RASHID versus SAKHI MUHAMMAD


Article 199 Constitutional Jurisdiction The High Court's use of the remand order has been challenged before a litigation patent bench plea that there is sufficient material on record, whether the High Court decides the matter of competence under the scope of its constitutional jurisdiction. The courses are open. The High Court, however, did not suffer any form of weakness, legal or otherwise, in the case of remand order which resulted in the remand order.

1986 S C M R 304

Present: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ

ABDUL RASHID and others‑‑Petitioners

versus

SAKHI MUHAMMAD and others‑‑Respondents

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 1257 of 1980, decided on 8th September, 1985.

(From the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 16‑8‑1980, passed in 1. C.A. No 482 of 1980).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of‑‑Remand order by High Court challenged before Letters Patent Bench‑‑Plea that there being enough material on record, High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction should have decided case on merits, repelled‑ Held, even if two courses were open to High Court, adoption of course which resulted in remand order in circumstances of case suffered from no infirmity, legal or otherwise‑‑Leave to appeal refused.

Ch. Muhammad Abdullah, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 8th September, 1985.

ORDER

MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑

‑Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment, dated 16‑8‑1980 of Lahore High Court; whereby petitioner's Intra Court Appeal arising out of a remand order passed by a learned Single Judge in a land settlement case, was dismissed.

2. The only plea raised by the learned counsel in the High Court was that instead of remanding the case, the learned Judge should have in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction decided the case on merits; as there was enough material including fresh evidence recorded in the High Court. He also expressed the apprehension that a party to the proceedings, on account of the proceedings after remand would have opportunity of resiling from his previous position, which was favourable to the petitioners.

3. All these points were noted by the Letter's Patent Bench and, the approach of the learned Judge was approved. There is nothing illegal in it. Even if two courses were open to the High Court, in the circumstances of the case, the adoption of the course which resulted in the remand order suffers from no infirmity, legal or otherwise. Leave to appeal is refused.

M.I. 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.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
law firms from Killa Saifullah lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.