Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SALEEM QURESHI versus V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KARACHI

Section 144 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Article 173 Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979), Article 15 Constitution Pakistan, Article 199 Constitution Petition was ordered to evict the tenant and the house was handed over to him. The review of such order cannot be attended by a re-hearing of the adjudicated case in respect of the jurisdiction of the order. The judgment or order cannot be revised on the basis that the court has taken an incorrect view or Another view on reconsideration may not be allowed on the ground. In the present case, the discovery of some new material contention was already decided on a material basis and the evidence based on the record was already handed over to the landlord and the order approved in the execution. The current review request was filed for disappointment. The application period for review of any order / decision was given 90 days but the present application has been filed after 300 days so that the matter should be explained by the applicant to make the request for review. A lawyer's negligence cannot be construed as a basis for late condolences. Revision request dismissed in circumstances \ r \ n \ r \ n

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014

• ALI RAZA v. MUHAMMAD SHOAIB 2014 CLC 1343
• THARPARKAR SUGAR MILLS LIMITED v. BANKERS EQUITY LIMITED 2014 CLD 1343
• GHULAM ABBAS v. S.H.O. POLICE STATION DARRI 2014 PCrLJ 1347
• MUNEER AHMED v. State 2014 YLR 1348
• IGI INVESTMENT BANK LIMITED v. ADMORE GAS (PVT.) LTD. 2014 CLD 1354
• NAZEER v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1358
• Mst. MUMTAZ BEGUM v. MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN alias SERAJ 2014 MLD 1361
• Syed MUHAMMAD ABBAS RIZVI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Establishment Division, Islamabad 2014 PLC(CS) 1363

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2014 →

list of supreme court advocates from Sajawal lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes