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

NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN vs MUHAMMAD ADEEL R — 2024 PLC(CS) 846 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation
2024 PLC(CS) 846 SUPREME-COURT
Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year
2024
Reporter
PLC
Parties
NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN vs MUHAMMAD ADEEL R
Subject matter
Service
Provisions referred to
S. 3; Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972); Law Reforms 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

NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN VS MUHAMMAD ADEEL R. 40---Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972), S. 3(2), proviso---Intra Court Appeal (ICA) filed by the bank---Maintainability---In the instant case, the proceedings under the National Bank of Pakistan (Staff) Service Rules, 1973, provide for an appeal under Rule 40 against the original order---This is sufficient to disentitle the parties to maintain an intra-court appeal, irrespective of the fact that one or more of the parties to the proceedings did not have a right of appeal against original order---Therefore, ICA is not maintainable in the present case---Petition was dismissed and leave was declined. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 846 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN VS MUHAMMAD ADEEL S. 3(2), proviso---Intra Court Appeal (ICA)---Maintainability---Test to determine whether remedy of ICA is available---Main test to determine whether an ICA is available under the proviso to Section 3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 ('the Ordinance') is to see whether the proceedings, in which the original order has been passed, provide for an appeal, revision or review (collectively referred to as "appeal," for convenience) to any Court, Tribunal or authority against the original order---Applying this test what needs to be seen and verified is whether the proceedings provided for an appeal against the original order and not whether parties to the proceedings enjoyed the right to appeal against the original order---Proviso under Section 3(2) of the Ordinance is proceedings specific and not parties specific---So it matters less if one of the parties to the proceedings is not entitled to right of appeal against the original order passed in the said proceedings.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC

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