Judgment

  1. Government did not appeal to the High Court against the judgment of Additional District Judge — Thus, this finding cannot be interfered. Azad Govt. & 2 others v. Sahibzada Muhammad Dawood Shah & 3 others 1999 SCR 381 (C)
  2. Judgment is expression of Court’s opinion given after due consideration of pleadings of the parties  and arguments addressed before the court or special Tribunal performing judicial functions — In the present case the Tribunal mentioned in detail the respective pleadings of the parties and the points raised, but has not resolved the same — No reason has been given in support of the conclusion nor the order contained evaluation of documentary  evidence — Therefore the judgment of the Tribunal is no judgment in the eye of law. Abdul Haq Mughal  v. Muhammad Naseer Usmani and 2 others 2002 SCR 146 (A)
  3. Under section 367 Cr.P.C. the order of dismissal of appeal in default is not the judgment. Muhammad Shabbir v. Muhammad Hussain & others 2002 SCR 351 (B)
  4. The judgment of Division Bench is binding upon the single Judge and decision of full Court upon the Division Bench and Single Bench — If a single Judge has passed an order directly in conflict with the view taken by the Division Bench or Full Court such judgment can be reviewed in order to bring it in conformity with the binding view taken by the Division Bench of Full Court — In the same way the Division Bench is bound to follow the judgment of the Full Court — However, the judgment of a Single Judge is not binding upon single Judge and in the same way the Judgment of a Division Bench is not binding upon another Division Bench. Ajaib Hussain and another v. Zareen Akhter and 11 others 2003 SCR 66 (A)
  5. Law points of importance left unresolved by the Court — It is for the Court to redress the same. Ghazi Vegetable Ghee & Oil Mills Limited Mangla Mirpur v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & 3 others 2004 SCR 158 (F)
  6. S. 152 C.P.C. — Judgments, decrees or orders — Clerical or arithmetical mistakes — Correction of — Mistakes which are result of accidental slips or omissions may be corrected by the Court at any time on the application of any of the parties or on its own motion. Kareem Dad v. Fazal Karim & 2 others 2004 SCR 289 (A)
  7. It is always expected that a judicial officer will pass a speaking order to enable every one to have an idea or the view which found favour with the Presiding Officer — The judgment should contain concise statement of the case, points for determination, the decision thereon and reasons for such decision — The judicial order must be speaking and manifesting by itself that the Court has applied its mind. Muhammad Irshad & 11 others v. Mst. Hanifa Begum & 8 others 2006 SCR 358 (B)
  8. Judgment of the High Court — Finality of — A writ was filed in the High Court for implementation of a Government Notification — Writ was accepted and direction was issued — But contrary to that notification another notification was issued by Finance Department — An application was filed before the High Court for implementation of the judgment of the High Court which was accepted — It was directed that the judgment of the High Court shall be implemented in letters and spirit — This PLA was filed against the judgment of the High Court by the Finance Secretary — While dismissing the PLA it was held that unfortunately a lot of amount has been spent on unnecessary litigation — The judgment of the High Court has become final — No alternative left but to implement the judgment in letters and spirit — PLA dismissed. Finance Secretary v. Saif-ud-Din and another 2006 SCR 90 (A)
  9. It was enjoined upon the learned Judge of the High Court to mention the points raised by the learned counsel for the parties and then resolve all those points — The learned Judge did not bother to state the arguments or the points raised — This judgment is no judgment in the eye of law — Under law it was obligatory for High Court to give details of points raised and then record its finding on those points. Muhammad Rashid  v. Ch. Munshi Khan & 7 others 2007 SCR 86 (A)
  10. The judgment or the order of the Court should be very clear — All the disputed points have been dealt with in an analytical manner and the mind has been applied by the Court — Due consideration has been given to the facts, law and contentions raised by the counsel for the parties. Muhammad Rashid  v. Ch. Munshi Khan & 7 others 2007 SCR 86 (B) 1992 CLC 2063 relied.
  11. It is paramount duty of the Court to consider all the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties — Any omission on the part of the Court would amount to failure to look into the disputed points and it is a vital error which would not be lightly ignored — It could not be excepted from a Judge of High Court that his judgment not fulfilled the requirement of judgment and not contains: (I) The detail facts of the case, (ii) points in dispute between the parties, (iii) contentions raised by the parties, and (iv) opinion on the contentions raised by the counsel for the parties. Muhammad Rashid  v. Ch. Munshi Khan & 7 others 2007 SCR 86 (C) PLD 1986 SC (AJ&K) 56 Relied.
  12. The judgment should conform with the provisions of law — It should contain concise statement of the case, the points for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for such decision — Any omission on the part of the Court amounts to wastage of valuable time and unnecessary expenses and trouble to litigant public as well as encourages further litigation. Muhammad Rashid v. Ch. Munshi Khan & 7 others 2007 SCR 86 (D) PLD 1978 S.C. (AJ&K) 161 and PLD 1988 S.C. (AJ&K) 184 relied.
  13. The judgment is expression of Court’s opinion after giving due consideration to the pleadings of parties, evidence and arguments addressed before the Court — It did not contain as such, then it is no judgment in the eye of law. Muhammad Rashid  v. Ch. Munshi Khan & 7 others 2007 SCR 86 (E) 2002 SCR 146 relied.
  14. The judgment of the High Court neither contains detailed facts of the case nor the points raised by the learned counsel for the parties — It was enjoined upon the learned Judge of the High Court to mention the points raised by both the learned counsel for the parties and resolve all those points — From the perusal of the judgment it does not reveal that what were the disputed points between the parties — Held: This judgment is no judgment in the eye of law. Ch. Muhammad Sadiq v. Mujahid Hussain Naqvi 2008 SCR 406 (A)
  15. Judgment should be very clear and after examining the judgement one should satisfy that all the disputed points have been resolved by the Court after applying judicious mind — The order should clearly contain the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and finding of the Court on those. Ch. M. Sadiq v. Mujahid Hussain Naqvi 2008 SCR 406 (D) 1992 CLC 2036 rel.
  16. It is fundamental duty of the Court to consider all the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties — Any omission on the part of the Court would amount to failure to look into the disputed points is a vital error which could not be ignored — A judgment should contain: (I) the detailed facts of the case, (ii) points in dispute between the parties, (iii) contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and (iv) opinion on the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties. Ch. M. Sadiq v. Mujahid H. Naqvi  2008 SCR 406 (E) PLD 1986 SC (AJ&K) 56 rel.
  17. Judgment should contain concise statement of the case, points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for such decision — Omission on the part of the Court amounts to wastage of valuable time and unnecessary expenses and trouble to litigant public as well as encourages further litigation. Ch. M. Sadiq v. Mujahid H. Naqvi 2008 SCR 406 (F)  PLD 1978 SC (AJ&K) 161 rel.
  18. Any omission on the part of lower Court amounts to burden the litigant public with unnecessary expenses — When the case will be remanded then they have to engage the counsel, pay fee and they have to further undergo the agony of litigation. Ch. Muhammad Sadiq v. Mujahid Hussain Naqvi 2008 SCR 406 (G) PLD 1988 SC (AJ&K) 184 rel.
  19. A judgment is expression of Court’s opinion after giving due consideration to the pleading of the parties, evidence and arguments addressed — It is the duty of the Court to mention in detail the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the parties — If the judgment did not contain as such then it is no judgment in the eye of law. Ch. Muhammad Sadiq v. Mujahid Hussain Naqvi 2008 SCR 406 (H) 2002 SCR 146 rel.
  20. In the instant case both the learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the impugned judgment is no judgment in the eye of law — Held: The impugned judgment does not fulfil the requirement of a judgment, thus it is set aside and the case remanded to the High Court with the direction that it shall hear the case afresh and dispose of the same within a period of three months from the receipt of this order. Ch. Muhammad Sadiq v. Mujahid Hussain Naqvi 2008 SCR 406 (I)
  21. — announcement of— No specific time period for announcement of judgment in —CPC applicable to the writ proceedings— apex Court of Pakistan in the case reported as 2015 SCMR 1550 opined that judgment should be announced in a reasonable time which is prescribed as 3 months—held: in case of Constitutional Courts the observation recorded by the apex Court of Pakistan reported as 2015 SCMR 1550 liable to be followed. Muhammad Maroof v.Syed Ashfaq Hussain Shah & others 2017 SCR 1496 (A&E)
  22. — pronouncement in civil cases—the Courts have to deliver the judgment soon after hearing the arguments— If there is a considerable interval between hearing the arguments and announcing the judgment, then it would be deemed that judgment was delivered without hearing the parties concerned. Muhammad Maroof v.Syed Ashfaq Hussain Shah & others 2017 SCR 1496 (B) PLD 1987 SC (AJ&K) 21 rel.
  23. — no valid judgment can be given without hearing the parties— a judgment delivered about four and half months after hearing the arguments of the parties would be tantamount to delivering judgment without hearing the parties — such a judgment would not be a legal decision. Muhammad Maroof v.Syed Ashfaq Hussain Shah & others  2017 SCR 1496 (C)
  24. —held: the judgment delivered by the Courts after more than 3 months will be deemed to be a judgment without hearing the parties. Muhammad Maroof v.Syed Ashfaq Hussain Shah & others  2017 SCR 1496 (D)  PLD 1960 (AJ&K) 11 rel.
  25. —ingredients of judgment—under law the judgment should be based on the material available on record and reasons must be an outcome of the said material and on the basis of such reasons conclusion should be drawn. Case remanded, as impugned judgement does not fall within purview of the judgement. Mehmood Hussain v. Imam Din & others 2019 SCR 489 (A) PLD 2002 SC 84 & 2008 SCR 406 rel
  26. —Contents of—trial Court partially decreed the suit—District Judge set aside the decree— it was enjoined upon the High Court to record its findings on material issues and resolve the controversy in the light of pleadings and evidence—under law the judgment should be based on the material available on record and reasons must be an outcome of the said material and on the basis of such reason conclusion should be drawn. Noor Muhammad & others v. Muhammad Younas & others 2022 SCR 170 (A) 2008 SCR 406, 1992 CLC 2036, PLD 1978 SC (AJK) 161 and PLD 1988 SC (AJK) 184 rel
  27. —See Muneeza Begum v. Maqsood Bi & others  2022 SCR 907 (A)
  28. — ingredients of — under law the judgment should be based on the material available on record and reason must be an outcome of the said material and on the basis of such reasons conclusion should be drawn. SERRA & others v. Masood Pervaiz & others 2023 SCR 243 (A) 2019 SCR 489, 1992 CLC 2036, PLD 1978 SC(AJ&K) 161 & PLD 1988 SC(AJ&K) 184 ref.
  29. — according to settled law, a judgment of the Court should be based on pleadings of the parties and no Court or Tribunal can travel beyond it. Syed Fida Hussain Kazmi versus Tariq Mehmood Khan & others 2023 SCR 840 (A) 2008 SCR 78 rel.
error: Content is protected !!