Loading... Account
Dark Mode
Step 1 of 8

Welcome!

Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7

Welcome!

Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.

Latest Judgments (All Jurisdictions within Pakistan)

Razi Rizwan vs VC. Gomal University

Citation: 2014 PLC CS 318

Case No: CM.No.16

Judgment Date: 24/01/2013

Jurisdiction: Peshawar High Court

Judge: Justice

Summary: Not joining by top candidate then 2nd on merit list is entitle for appointment

Abdul Haleem and others V. Mir Zahid and others,

Citation: PLD 2013 Balochistan 62

Case No: Constitutional Petitions Nos. 897 of 2007 and 713 of 2010

Judgment Date: 24/01/2013

Jurisdiction: Balochistan High Court

Judge: Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail

Summary: British Balochistan Rent Control Regulation (II of 1945)-------S. 1---West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 (VI of 1959), S. 21 &Preamble---West Pakistan Civil Courts Ordinance (II of 1962), S. 3---Constitution of Pakistan,Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Redundant legislation---Effect---Eviction applications filedagainst petitioners under the British Balochistan Rent Control Regulation, 1945 were allowed byTrial Court---Contention of the petitioners was that British Balochistan Rent Control Regulation,1945 was no longer in field and therefore, order of Trial Court was illegal---Contention of therespondents was that the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 had not beenextended to Tribal Areas, to which the present cases pertained, therefore, the British BalochistanRent Control Regulation, 1945 was still applicable---Validity---British Balochistan Rent ControlRegulation, 1945 was promulgated in the year, 1945 and extended to the whole of BritishBalochistan, and the Chief Commissioner was assigned the power to extend the said regulationto other areas and was authorized to make Rules---After the creation of Pakistan, and uponestablishment of the province of Balochistan, the areas known as British Balochistan were nolonger in existence, and therefore the British Balochistan Rent Control Regulation, 1945 ceasedto hold field---Office of the Chief Commissioner under the said regulation had been abolishedand no authority was left to extend the said regulation to the new province---Proceedings underthe British Balochistan Rent Control Regulation, 1945 were to be conducted by the courtsestablished under the British Balochistan Courts Regulation, 1938 which had also ceased to exist as presently, the courts were established under the Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962 for the civilmatters---Courts were, therefore, not competent to try rent matters under British BalochistanRent Control Regulation, 1945---Proceedings under the British Balochistan Rent ControlRegulation, 1945 were coram non judice---High Court observed that West Pakistan Urban RentRestriction Ordinance, 1959 was applicable to all urban areas and there would be no harm, withthe approval of the Governor, to extend the same to Tribal Areas to provide the people of suchareas a mechanism in rent matters---High Court held that no court or Rent Controller shallproceed in matters under the British Balochistan Rent Control Regulation (II of 1945) anddirected the Secretary Law and Parliamentary Affairs, of the Provincial Government toimmediately take steps for extension of West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959to Tribal Areas within a period of thirty days---Constitutional petitions were allowed,accordingly.

Muhammad Rabani and 5 others V. Agha Arshad through Imran Ali and another,

Citation: 2013 MLD 1083

Case No: C.M. Appeal No.15 of 2012

Judgment Date: 24/01/2013

Jurisdiction: Balochistan High Court

Judge: Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail

Summary: (a) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)-------Ss. 34, 41(b) & Second Schedule---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2---Arbitration agreement---Power to stay legal proceedings---Scope---Powers of the court under theSecond Schedule of the Arbitration Act, 1940, could be exercised by issuing an interim order forthe preservation and safety of the subject matter---Mere filing of an application under S.34 of theArbitration Act, 1940, or even stay of the proceedings and referring the matter to the Arbitratorshould not preclude the Trial Court from dealing with the injunction application.(b) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)-------S.34---Expression "Any other step into proceeding"---Connotation---Expression was not relatable to any step, action or inaction taken by the defendant during the proceedings of interimapplications but was applicable only to the proceedings of the main case.

MEHWISH MUGHAL VS PROVINCE OF SINDH THROUGH SECRETARYHOME DEPARTMENT

Citation: 2014 PCrLJ 229

Case No: C. P. No. D-103/2013

Judgment Date: 23-01-2013

Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court

Judge: Justice Sajjad Ali Shah

Summary: Summary pending.

PRUDENTIAL PLC VS SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Citation: 2013 SCMR 403

Case No: ON APPEAL FROM [2010] EWCA CIV 1094

Judgment Date: 23-01-2013

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of UK

Judge: Justice Lord Neuberger

Summary: Summary pending.

KHAN DEHPAL VS GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN

Citation: 2013 SCMR 759

Case No: C. P. No. 14-Q/2013

Judgment Date: 23-01-2013

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of Pakistan

Judge: Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali

Summary: Summary pending.

WAJID HUSSAIN VS THE STATE

Citation: 2013 MLD 698

Case No: CrM No. 662-B/2012

Judgment Date: 23-01-2013

Jurisdiction: Islamabad High Court

Judge: Justice Iqbal Hameedur Rahman

Summary: Summary pending.

AMANULLAH VS THE STATE

Citation: 2013 YLR 1244

Case No: C.AS Nos. 727 AND 111/2010

Judgment Date: 23-01-2013

Jurisdiction: Peshawar High Court

Judge: Justice Mian Fasih Ul Mulk

Summary: Summary pending.

MUMTAZ ALI VS THE STATE

Citation: 2013 YLR 1619

Case No: C.AS Nos. 225 AND 226/2003

Judgment Date: 23-01-2013

Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court

Judge: Justice Irfan Saadat Khan

Summary: Summary pending.

ABDUL RAZZAK VS SYED HAFEEZUDDIN

Citation: 2013 YLR 2471

Case No: ELECTION PETITION No. 7 AND C. M. A. No. 18/2013

Judgment Date: 23-01-2013

Jurisdiction: SINDH Tribunal

Judge: Justice Dr. Fida Muhammad Khan

Summary: Summary pending.

Disclaimer: AI/GPT is not a substitute for legal advice. The content on this website is for research only. In case of breach of T.O.S, PLDB reserves the right to revoke or ban membership at any time without notice. Pak Legal Database ® 2023-2026. All Rights Reserved. Version 4.05.2a. Designed & developed by theblinklabs.com

error: Content Protection Enabled
Scroll to Top