Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Civil Petitions Nos.976, 977, 978 of 1986, decided on 6th October, 1986.
---Art.199--Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of--Tribunal having jurisdiction in matter had dismissed appeal being barred by time Order passed by such Tribunal in accordance with law, held, could not be interfered with by High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction.
Nooruddin N. Ramzan for Petitioner.
--The petitioner being aggrieved against the order, dated 15-3-1983 passed by the Director, Octroi, K . M. C . has preferred this petition.
The facts are that the petitioner Messrs Popular Clearing Services are the authorised clearing and forwarding agents of Messrs Premier Tobacco Industries Ltd. who imported a consignment of 124 cases of un-manufactured tobacco from abroad under a Bill of Entry for Bond No.P.W. 6329, dated 17-5-1982. It was meant for immediate export to upcountry. Accordingly, the petitioners under Transit Pass Registration No.1975, dated 23-5-1982 availed the transit pass facility. As such on their furnishing a security deposit of Rs.38,067 the petitioners presented the original T . P. R . and two Gate Passes at West Wharf Gate and obtained a Transit Pass No.31790, dated 25-5-1982 for 62 cases of the goods. The said T.P. was discharged in time at Super Highway Octroi Post. The petitioners however failed to obtain another T.P. in respect of the rest of 62 cases of un-manufactured tobacco which they despatched to its destination after loading on N.L.C. Truck. Then the petitioners applied for return of the security deposit but this request was rejected. The petitioners then filed an appeal for setting aside the said order before the Chairman /Judge, Appellate Tribunal Local Councils Sind, Karachi and it was ordered that the appeal is signed by the Advocate for the appellant and it is not verified and signed by the appellant, as required under Rule 5 of Appeal Rules. The same was dismissed. The petitioners filed another appeal duly signed and verified by the petitioners but that appeal was barred by time. Hence, the same was dismissed. Thereafter, he filed a Review Application but the same was also dismissed.
The learned counsel for. the petitioners has contended that omission to sign the pleadings or its verification is merely a defect of procedure which does not affect the jurisdiction of the Court and consequently the same can be allowed to be corrected at any stage by amendment even at the appellate stage. This objection has no force because the petitioners themselves accepted the same ands thereafter no appeal was filed but the same was dismissed being barred by time. The Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter has decided the appeal in accordance with law. The petition has no force. The same is dismissed.
H.B.T./P-5/K. Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer