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

SARDAR ALI KHAN vs STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN Scope — 2022 SCMR 1454 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation
2022 SCMR 1454 SUPREME-COURT
Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year
2022
Reporter
SCMR
Parties
SARDAR ALI KHAN vs STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN Scope
Subject matter
Constitutional

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

SARDAR ALI KHAN VS STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN Scope---Doctrine of acquiescence is grounded upon a conduct that if a person sighted another person about to commit an act infringing upon his rights who might otherwise have abstained from it to believe that he assents to its being committed, he cannot afterwards be heard to complain of the act. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1454 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SARDAR ALI KHAN VS STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN Contractual relation---Relationship of master and servant implies a contractual relation in which one party agrees to be under the control of other and the servant is bound to obey orders not only as to the work that he would execute but also as to the details of the work and the manner of its execution and in return, the master has to pay wages---Relationship between master and servant is the existence of right in the master to supervise and control the work done by the servant not only in the matter of directing what work the servant is to do but also the manner in which he shall do his work. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1454 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SARDAR ALI KHAN VS STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN "Qui approbat non reprobat (one who approbates cannot reprobate)"---Said maxim is akin to the doctrine of benefits and burdens which at its most basic level provides that a person taking advantage under an instrument which both grants a benefit and imposes a burden cannot take the former without complying with the latter---Person cannot approbate and reprobate or accept and reject the same instrument. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1454 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SARDAR ALI KHAN VS STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN art. 114---Estoppel---Scope---article 114 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 defines the doctrine of estoppel under which when a person has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative to deny the truth of that thing---Said principle is founded on equity and justness with the objective to prevent fraud and ensure justice---Though it is described as a rule of evidence but may have effect of constituting substantive rights. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1454 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SARDAR ALI KHAN VS STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN art. 185---appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court---Scope---Concurrent findings of courts below---Supreme Court cannot not go behind concurrent findings of fact unless it can be shown that the finding is on the face of it against the evidence or so patently improbable, or perverse that to accept it could amount to perpetuating a grave miscarriage of justice, or if there has been any misapplication of principle relating to appreciation of evidence, or finally, if the finding can be demonstrated to be physically impossible. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1454 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case SARDAR ALI KHAN VS STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN art. 199---Master and servant---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---Employee of a private bank aggrieved of his pensionary and retirement benefits---In the present case, the private bank was not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under article 199 of the Constitution nor it was a case of violation or contravention of any statutory rules of service which could be agitated in the High Court in its writ jurisdiction---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed ad leave was refused. Head NotesCase Description

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR

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