Skip to main content

2013 S C M R 587

Limitation for challenging a void order --- Scope --- Sales Tax Department passed order in original against the petitioner-company --- Appeal filed against such order was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal as being time-barred --- Petitioner-company contended that order in original passed by department was a void order that no limitation ran against a void order, and that such aspect was not appreciated by the Appellate Tribunal, the High Court and the Supreme Court --- Validity --- Rule that no limitation ran against a void order was not an inflexible rule --- Party could not sleep over to challenge a void order and it was bound to challenge the same within the stipulated/ prescribed time period of limitation from the date of knowledge before the proper forum in appropriate proceedings --- Appeal filed before the Appellate tribunal was admittedly time-barred, and was rightly dismissed as being hit by limitation and so sufficient cause for condonation of delay was found --- High Court agreed with the order of Appellate Tribunal --- Supreme Court had affirmed concurrent findings recorded by fora below --- Review petition was dismissed in circumstances. 


For more, you can consult omara.khan789@gmail.com or call +923123450006

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Co-sharer

Possession of one co-sharer in possession of all . 1998 MLD 857, 1857; 2006 YLR 831; 2008 SCMR 661, 616; 2008 SCMR 905. Co-sharer to establish right of co-heirship . 2008 MLD 278.  For  more , you can consult omara.khan789@gmail.com or call +923123450006

Entrustment of property and dishonest misappropriation of entrusted property

  PLJ 2026 SC 96 [Appellate Jurisdiction] Present:   Sardar Tariq Masood and Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, JJ. AYESHA TAYYAB--Petitioner versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION CANTT.DISTRICT SIALKOT, etc.--Respondents C.P. No. 1575 of 2024, decided on 22.5.2025. (On appeal against the order dated 08.03.2024 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No. 1684 of 2024) Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 406--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199(1)(a)(ii)--Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898), S. 561-A--Quashment of criminal proceedings and Quashment of FIR--Entrustment of property and dishonest   misappropriation   of   entrusted   property--“Qarz-e-Hasna”--Amount was handed over as a loan/trust--High Court observed that no offence under section 406 PPC was made out from contents of FIR and proceeded to quash same under its constitutional jurisdiction conferred by Article 199--Contents of FIR determine whether a cogni...

Scope of Quashment Petition in Azad Jammu & Kashmir

PLJ 2021 AJ&K 33 [Shariat Appellate Bench] Present:  Raja Sajjad Ahmad Khan, J. SAQIB HUSSAIN and another--Petitioners versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION, DHIRKOT and 2 others--Respondents Misc. Crl. P. No. 132 of 2019, decided on 9.7.2020. AJ&K Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Act, 1985-- ----S. 16-2(L)--"Public place" means a street, road, thoroughfare, park, garden or other place to which the public have free access and includes a hotel, restaurant, motel, mess and club, but does include the residential room of a hotel in the occupation of some person."                                                                      ...