livelawpk.com - The Appeal or Petition which is not re-filed ---

The Appeal or Petition which is not re-filed within the Stipulated Period after Initial Office Objections is considered Time-Barred --- Lahore High Court, Lahore

2 months, 3 weeks
68

The Appeal or Petition which is not re-filed within the Stipulated Period after Initial Office Objections is considered Time-Barred --- Lahore High Court, Lahore

Islamabad 01-10-2024: The Lahore High Court has dismissed Civil Revision No. 25008 and Civil Revision No. 25021 of 2023 due to procedural delays and failure to comply with the stipulated limitation period for filing. The judgment, issued by Honorable Mr. Justice Sultan Tanvir Ahmad, upheld the rights of the prior purchaser and denied relief for specific performance and cancellation of a sale deed in favor of the petitioner.

The case originated from a suit filed on September 2, 2003, by the petitioner, Zulfiqar Ali, seeking specific performance of an agreement dated July 23, 2003, against Respondent No. 1, and another party. The petitioner also sought a permanent injunction and cancellation of a sale deed dated June 13, 2009, in favor of Respondent No. 3 concerning a disputed property.

On September 22, 2020, the trial court decreed in favor of Zulfiqar Ali and directed the cancellation of the sale deed. However, upon appeal, the appellate court reversed the decision on October 29, 2021, recognizing Respondent No. 3 as the prior purchaser and thus ruling that the sale deed could not be annulled. The petitioner was instead awarded limited relief under Section 65 of the Contract Act, 1872, for compensation due to non-performance of the contract by Respondent No. 1.

The petitioner subsequently filed civil revisions against the appellate court’s decision on February 9, 2022. However, the court office raised multiple objections, including incomplete documentation and lack of the required court fee. Despite being given a three-day period to rectify the objections, the petitioner re-filed the revisions on April 12, 2023, resulting in a delay of 530 days.

Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Asad Ali and 9 Others Versus The Bank of Punjab and Others (PLD 2020 Supreme Court 736), the Lahore High Court reaffirmed that any appeal or petition that is not re-filed within the stipulated period after initial objections are raised is considered time-barred.

Mr. Justice Sultan Tanvir Ahmad dismissed the petitions in limine, referencing several precedents, including Lahore Development Authority v. Muhammad Rashid (1997 SCMR 1224) and Province of Punjab through District Officer Revenue, Rawalpindi and others versus Muhammad Sarwar (2014 SCMR 1358), which establish that failure to comply with the time limits renders an appeal invalid.

The court also rejected the petitioner’s application for condonation of delay, noting that the explanation of misplacement of files due to the shifting of counsel’s office was unsupported by any evidence. The judgment highlighted that condonation of delay cannot be granted based on unsubstantiated claims.

In its final ruling, the High Court reinforced the principle that the rights of a prior purchaser take precedence over subsequent agreements. Since Respondent No. 3’s purchase was deemed valid and prior to the agreement with the petitioner, the court refused to cancel the sale deed. The judgment effectively upheld the decision of the appellate court and denied specific performance in favor of the petitioner.

The ruling serves as a strong reminder of the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and the limitations period in civil litigation. It also reaffirms the rights of prior purchasers in property disputes and sets a precedent for future cases involving similar legal issues.

The case, which spanned over two decades, concluded with the dismissal of the petitioner’s revisions, leaving the appellate court’s judgment intact and emphasizing the strict application of procedural rules in revisional jurisdiction.