Held, allegations as levelled in the F.I.R. necessarily required holding of a factual inquiry which exercise could not be undertaken by the High Court in summary proceedings under Art. 199 of the Constitution and, in circumstances, it would be premature for High Court to comment upon the veracity or otherwise, of the allegations contained in the said F.I.R. Purpose of quashing F.I.R. through exercise of constitutional jurisdiction being primarily to save a person from the rigours of an unjustified investigation and if investigation of a criminal case had already been finalized the High Court would generally be slow in interfering in the matter at such a stage as in case of submission of challan before the Court of competent jurisdiction many remedies would become available to the affected person.
For more, you can consult omara.khan789@gmail.com or call +923123450006When an application for restoration of suit is allowed, all interim orders passed prior to dismissal of suit for non-prosecution, stand revived
PLJ 2018 Islamabad 276 Present : Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, J. M/s. PANTHER DEVELOPERS--Petitioner versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (ADJ), WEST, ISLAMABAD and 2 others--Respondents W.P. No. 977 of 2018, decided on 10.4.2018. Islamabad Rent Restriction Ordinance, 2001 (IV of 2001)-- ----S. 17(9)--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199--Execution of lease agreement--Default in payment of rent--Violation of terms and Conditions--Eviction Petition--Dismissed for non prosecution--Application for restoration--Allowed--Tentative order--Struck off right of defence--Eviction Petition allowed--Appeal was dismissed--Determination--Direction to--It is well settled that when a suit is dismissed for non-prosecution, and an application for restoration is filed, Court/Tribunal can, while said application is pending, pass interim orders--It is also well settled that when an application for restoration of suit is allowed, all interim orders passed prior to dismissal of suit for non...
Comments
Post a Comment