AMIR ZADA vs Mian ZAMIN KHAN Ss — 2021 CLC 2042 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation: 2021 CLC 2042 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court: Peshawar High Court
Year: 2021
Reporter: CLC
Parties: AMIR ZADA vs Mian ZAMIN KHAN Ss
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 18---P; S. 6; S. 18; S. 96; Civil Courts Ordinance (II of 1962); Civil Courts Ordinance; Civil Procedure Code; General Clauses Ordinance

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

AMIR ZADA VS Mian ZAMIN KHAN Ss.6 & 96---Civil Courts Ordinance (II of 1962), S.18---Pecuniary jurisdiction---Forum for first appeal disputed---Section 18 of the Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962 was substituted in 2017 and Ss.6 & 96 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 were substituted in 2020 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province---Pecuniary jurisdiction of District judge to hear appeal was enhanced to Rs.10 Million---Under substituted S.6, pecuniary jurisdiction of District court was set as Rs.50 Million or above---Appeal against any final judgment/decree passed by civil Court was to be filed before District judge concerned and therefore jurisdiction of the latter stood enhanced to any amount less than Rs. 50 Million (albeit indirectly)---Held, that pecuniary limit for District Judge as appellate Court i.e. Rs.10 Million as provided by S.18 of the General Clauses Ordinance, 1962, could not prevent a District Court from hearing appeals of an amount of more than Rs.10 Million as provided in by S. 6 read with S.96 of C.P.C., for the reason that a non-obstante clause had been put in place in the substituted S.96 knowingly/intentionally so as to remove any doubts, which might have arisen because of conflict in the General Clauses Ordinance, 1962 and the amended provisions of C.P.C.---Jurisdiction of District Judge to hear appeals impugned judgments/decrees of Civil Judge stood vested despite subsequent amendments---Office (Registrar) was directed by High Court to transmit all the connected appeal separately to respective District Judges for deciding the same by himself or entrust it to any other competent Court for deciding according to law.

Other judgments reported in 2021 CLC

2021 CLC 2042 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTAMIR ZADA VS Mian ZAMIN KHAN Non-obstante clause, over-riding factor of---Non-obstante clause was a legislative tool employed to give an ove…
2021 CLC 2042 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTAMIR ZADA VS Mian ZAMIN KHAN Procedural laws, retrospective effect of---Procedural laws normally have a retrospective effect, unless provide…
2021 CLC 746 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTMst. BIBI ROZA VS WALI-UR-REHMAN S.12(2)---application under S.12(2) C.P.C---Framing of issues---Scope---Though application under S.12(2) of…
2021 CLC 1813 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRTAHIR AYUB VS NAEEM AYUB S.122---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), Ss.42 & 12---"Gift"---Counter deeds---Registered document, evidentiary val…
2021 CLC 1813 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRTAHIR AYUB VS NAEEM AYUB 'Hiba', defined---Essentials of---Delivery of possession, over-riding effect of---Hiba was an unconditional transfe…
2021 CLC 1813 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRTAHIR AYUB VS NAEEM AYUB 'Gift', essentials of---Declaration, delivery of possession and without consideration---Any deed which involved any…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English