The Province of Punjab through Secretary, Sports and Youth Affairs Department Lahore vs Sabir Ali Ss

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

The Province of Punjab through Secretary, Sports and Youth Affairs Department Lahore VS Sabir Ali Ss. 3, 5 & First Sched., art. 156---Land acquisition act (I of 1894), S. 54---Land acquisition, matter of---appeal filed against Referee Court---Limitation---Condonation of delay---Sufficient cause---Scope ---appellant being a Government Department ---appeal was filed by Secretary-Government Department with the delay of 318 days ---Stance taken by the appellants (Secretary -Government Department) was that reference/ judgment was not in the knowledge due to prolonged correspondence among the offices---Validity ---Under S.3 of the Limitation act, 1908, it is the inherent duty of the Court to dilate into the question of limitation---Notably, the references were filed by the respondents in 2014 and after adopting due process, the same were decided by the Trial Court in the year 2024 which had been assailed under S.54 of the Land acquisition act---Present appeal had been filed with the delay of 318 days---The communication and correspondence inter se the departments cannot be considered a valid and reasonable ground for condonation of delay---Provisions of art.156 of the Limitation act, 1908, would apply to appeals filed under S.54 of the Land acquisition act--- The law of limitation is designed to ensure diligence in pursuing legal remedies---appellants had to explain the delay of each and every day with justified and cogent reasons---In the absence of any reasonable cause, the delay for such a long period cannot be condoned---Record revealed that the counsel for the appellants was appearing during the proceedings before the Trial court and participated in each and every step---Thus, the ground for no knowledge was against the admitted facts and record of the Trial court, therefore, had no substance---Even otherwise, limitation is not a mere technicality rather it creates a vested right for the opposite party and delay results in the extinction of a legal remedy unless valid reasons are taken---Record also revealed that the counsel for the appellants cross-examined the respondents and was present during the proceedings---Thus, the stance taken by the appellants was not justified and there was no sufficient reason to condone the limitation---Therefore, relying on the internal correspondence amongst the appellants was not sufficient cause and plausible explanation for condonation of delay---The appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation and the appellants could not justify such a long delay; thus, the appeal was badly time barred---application for condonation of delay was dismissed---Consequently, the appeal, being barred by time, was dismissed.

The Province of Punjab through Secretary, Sports and Youth Affairs Department Lahore vs Sabir Ali Ss — 2026 YLR 178 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR