Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: REHMAT ALI VS Respondent: MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE
1988 S C M R 1210
1988 S C M R 1210
Present: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ
REHMAT ALI and 4 others‑‑Petitioners
versus
MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE‑‑Respondent
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.966 of 1981, decided on 3rd May, 1988.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 21‑6‑1981 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Civil Revision No.332 of 1981).
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑
‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, R.11‑ Deficiency of court‑fee‑‑ Opportunity to supply deficiency‑‑Application of provisions of O.VII, R.11, C.P.C. to the filing of appeals Leave to appeal granted to consider contentions that provisions contained in O.VII, R.11, C.P.C. with regard to supply of the deficiency in court‑fee, are applicable to the filing of appeals; that it was incumbent upon the Appellate Court to determine the deficiency in the court‑fee; and that the petitioners should have been allowed at least one opportunity for supplying the deficiency, after proper and exact determination of the deficiency.
Siddique Khan and 2 others v . Abdul Shakur Khan and another P L D 1984 S C 289 rel.
Ch. Muhammad Aslam Sandhu, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Abdul Majid, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent. Date of hearing: 3rd May, 1988.
ORDER
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by judgment‑debtors in a suit for possession against judgment, dated 21‑6‑1981 of the Lahore High Court; whereby their Civil Revision was dismissed and the order of the dismissal of their appeal on ground of deficiency in the court‑fee, was affirmed.
2. The petition is reported by the office as time‑barred. We, having perused the reasons for condonation of delay in the application submitted in this behalf, condone the same.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on Siddique Khan and two ethers v. Abdul Shakur Khan and another P L D 1984 S C 289 to contend firstly that provisions contained in Order VII, Rule 11, C .P.C. with regard to opportunity to supply the deficiency in the court‑fee, are applicable to the filing of the appeals; that it was incumbent upon the appellate Court to determine the deficiency in the court‑fee; and, that the petitioners should have been allowed at least one opportunity for supplying the deficiency, after proper and exact determination of the deficiency.
3. Questions raised require examination. Leave to appeal is, accordingly, granted. Security Rs.5,000. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents, if necessary; and, it shall be heard at an early date.
M.I./R‑49/S Leave granted.