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.
Review No. 4 of 1961‑62, decided on 93rd February 1962, District Mardan.
Review application filed after 90 days‑Plea that application was made to President of Pakistan whose reply was awaited‑Not sufficient cause for condonation of delay‑Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 5.
This is an application for a review of my order dated 11‑5‑1961 in respect of certain rights claimed by the petitioners who are tenants and their landlords with regard to the land in dispute. A copy of the order appealed against was available to the petitioners on 23‑5‑1961 but an application for a review was made on 28‑10‑1961 i.e., after the lapse of a period of 90 days laid down in subsection (2) of section 8 of the Board of Revenue Act. The reason advanced to explain the delay so as to bring it within the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act is that the petitioners had made an application to the President on 31‑7‑1961 and they received a reply from the Board of Revenue dated 2‑10‑1961 informing them that their proper remedy was to apply for a review of the order passed against them. I am afraid these facts do not constitute sufficient cause within the meaning of section 5 of the Limitation Act. The parties had been litigating in respect of this land for some time in the Revenue Courts and could have been well aware of the remedy open to them. Besides a mistake in respect of the proper legal remedy has not been considered sufficient cause under the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act. I would accordingly decline to review the order passed by me and dismiss the application on the preliminary grounds of limitation.
S. B.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer