DISTRICT OFFICER FRONTIER CONSTABULARY, HAYATABAD, PESHAWAR vs Haji AMIR BADSHAH S — 2025 PLD 698 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation: 2025 PLD 698 SUPREME-COURT
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year: 2025
Reporter: PLD
Parties: DISTRICT OFFICER FRONTIER CONSTABULARY, HAYATABAD, PESHAWAR vs Haji AMIR BADSHAH S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 48---L; 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

DISTRICT OFFICER FRONTIER CONSTABULARY, HAYATABAD, PESHAWAR VS Haji AMIR BADSHAH S. 48---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), First Sched., Art. 181---Execution proceedings---Principle of merger---Respondent/decree holder filed fresh execution petition following judgment and decree passed by Appellate Court---Executing Court dismissed fresh execution petition as barred by time but High Court allowed the same on the principle of merger---Validity---Starting point of limitation of fresh Execution Petition, subsequent to first one, was the date of final judgment of final Court of Appeal---By applying principle of merger, judgment and decree of Trial Court merged with that of Appellate Court---It was the latter decree which was operative and executable, therefore, High Court rightly treated fresh application for execution of appellate decree as filed within limitation under section 48 C.P.C. and not under Article 181 of Limitation Act, 1908---Fresh Execution Petition filed by respondent subsequent to the first one was well within limitation, as it fell within six years after the decree of Appellate Court's judgment---Bar of limitation under Article 181 of Limitation Act, 1908 did not apply due to specific application of section 48 C.P.C. and the principle of merger---Supreme Court declined to interfere in the order passed by High Court as there was no illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional defect in it---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD

2025 PLD 87 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANUMAR VS GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Secretary Home and Tribal Affairs Department S. 3(1) [as amended by Balochistan Maintenance of Pub…
2025 PLD 572 SUPREME-COURTMUHAMMAD SHAKEEL VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAISALABAD S. 2 (d)---Word "party"---Connotation---Word "party"as defined in section 2(d) of…
2025 PLD 47 SUPREME-COURTGUL SADEM KHAN VS Mst. HALIMA Ss. 7 & 25---Custody of minor---Determining factors---Welfare of minor---Economic conditions---Scope---Petitio…
2025 PLD 1039 SUPREME-COURTSALEH MUHAMMAD VS Mst. MEHNAZ BEGUM S. 5, Sched.---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 33, 34 & 35---Family dispute---Recovery of dower, dowry a…
2025 PLD 850 SUPREME-COURTMUHAMMAD AMIN SAQIB VS JUDGE FAMILY COURT, TOBA TEK SINGH S.5, Sched.---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.151---Maintenance allowance for…
2025 PLD 847 SUPREME-COURTKHALID PERVAIZ UL HAQ VS Mst. MINHA ASIF Ss.12-a & 14(3)---Right of cross-examination struck off by Trial Court---Interlocutory order, chall…

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