PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

BAHADAR HILAL vs ANWAR HAYAT O — 2022 PLD 39 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2022 PLD 39 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
PLD
Parties
BAHADAR HILAL vs ANWAR HAYAT O
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 3; S. 14; Limitation Act (IX of 1908); Limitation Act

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

BAHADAR HILAL VS ANWAR HAYAT O. XLV, R. 15---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 3 & Art. 181---Execution---Objection petition---Limitation period, commencement of---Deeming clause---Appeal allowed by Supreme Court---Decree holders filed application for execution---Objections of Petitioners/judgment debtors thereagainst were dismissed by Civil Court, District Court and High Court---Petitioner contended that such applications could not be maintained as it had not been filed after getting authorization from High Court as required under O. XLV, R. 15 of Code of Civil Procedure, and that limitation was to commence from authorisation in terms of said Rule---Validity---While disposing of the earlier objection of petitioner, High Court had employed a deeming clause for validating the two applications from the date of its filing---Same had been ordered to be deemed to have been sent to the executing Court for execution under R. 15 of O. XLV of C.P.C.---When time could be relaxed (under S.14 of the Limitation Act, 1908) on the ground of pursuing a remedy before a wrong forum, then an action initiated before a competent Court of law but suffering from some technical defect might easily be considered to be proceedings valid for the purpose of counting the period of limitation---Irregularity could not come in the way of counting the period of limitation---Application for execution filed directly before civil Court could not be considered to be totally non est and non-considerable for the purpose of determining the question of limitation---Execution applications filed without compliance of the provision of O. XLV, R. 15, C.P.C. to be taken as sufficient for the purpose of bringing the pending proceedings within the prescribed period of limitation---Revision petition was dismissed accordingly. Head NotesCase Description

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLD

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