New point

  1. The point which was not raised in the Courts below and in the concise statement- cannot be permitted to raise at argument stage. Dpty Collector Excise v. Abdul Hamid 1993 SCR 363 (A)
  2. New point-new point not allowed to be raised for the first time in this court- unless it has been incorporated in the memorandum of appeal or the concise statement. M. Azad Khan v. The Secretary AJK Council 1993 SCR 387 (B)
  3. Point not taken in petition for leave to appeal cannot be allowed to be raised during arguments. Muhammad Sarwar Ahmad  v. The University of AJ&K and 6 others 1998 SCR 350 (F)
  4. A point not raised in the Courts below or before the High Court cannot be permitted to be raised or agitated for the first time before this Court. Farooq Bibi v. A. Khaliq others 1998 SCR 244 (B)
  5. A point which was not raised before any of the lower Tribunal but has been raised for the first time before this Court, the same cannot be allowed to be agitated. Muhammad Hayat Khan v. Board of Revenue and AJ&K 3 others 1999 SCR 158 (C)
  6. A new point which was not raised even in concise statement could not be allowed to be raised for the first time. Mushtaq Ahmad v. Azad Govt. and 3 others 1999 SCR 77 (B)
  7. Point of jurisdiction not raised in memo of appeal or concise statement — However, it goes to the root of case — Permitted to be raised — Observed that this Court has also taken suo motu notice of violation of constitutional jurisdiction in many cases. Habibullah Gannaie v. Wajahat Rashid Baig and 3 others 1999 SCR 429 (B)
  8. Point not specifically taken in the writ petition could not be allowed to have been taken for the first  time in the Supreme Court. A. Qadeer  v. AJK University and another 2000 SCR 36 (D)
  9. Objection that the respondent was not an aggrieved person therefore could not file writ — This point was not taken in memo of appeal and also not included in the concise statement — A new point cannot be raised during arguments. Naeem Feroze v. Iqbal Rashid Minhas 2001 SCR 91 (C)
  10. Point not argued before the High Court nor it finds mention in the impugned judgment, therefore, the same cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time before this Court. Muhammad Sohrab v. AJ&K Govt. and 6 others 2001 SCR 481 (C)
  11. A point which has not been raised in the pleadings cannot be raised for the first time before the Supreme Court. Inhabitants of Singola Through M. v. Azad Govt. & others 2001 SCR 518 (D)
  12. Point not argued at the time of hearing of regular appeal, same cannot be agitated for the first time by filing a review petition. M. Ilyas Khan others v. M. Hafeez Khan 2001 SCR 179 (C)
  13. Point not raised or decided in the High Court nor any leave was granted by this Court — Therefore, it is too late in the day to raise a point which was not subject of controversy either before the Custodian or the High Court. Custodian of Evacuee Property & 7 others v. Tariq mahmood Butt 2002 SCR 38 (D)
  14. A point not raised before the Courts below cannot be allowed to be raised before this Court — In exceptional cases a point of law going to the roots of the case is allowed to be raised — Question of framing an issue at this stage cannot be allowed — It is the duty of the Court as well as Advocates of the parties to ensure that necessary issues are framed. Karam Dad and 3 others  v. Barkat Jan and 10 others 2002 SCR 155 (A)
  15. Point not raised in the memo of appeal or in concise statement — Cannot be allowed for the first time in this Court. Muhammad Din & another v. Custodian of Evacuee Property & another 2002 SCR 93 (E)
  16. Point not raised either before the Judge Family Court or before the Shariat Court, the same cannot be allowed to be raised and argued for the first time before this Court. Muhammad Mafrooz v. Shafeen Akhtar 2002 SCR 321 (B)
  17. Plea was never urged or argued before the High Court. — Plea was not even raised in the memo of appeal before this Court nor any permission was sought from this Court to argue the point, the same cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time during the arguments in this Court. Ali Begum and 10 others v. Noor Hussain Khan 2003 SCR 30 (B)
  18. Point never agitated or argued before the High Court nor does it find mention in the judgment of High Court, cannot be allowed to be raised. Tariq Aziz v. Azad Govt. & 3others 2003 SCR 158 (E) 2001 SCR 481 rel.
  19. Point was not pressed before High Court nor there is any affidavit that point was pressed but same was not resolved — Cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time. M. Latif  v. BISE Mirpur & 4 others 2003 SCR 229 (A) 2003 SCR 158 & 2000 SCR 36 rel.
  20. At the time of seeking leave by this Court, the point was not taken up by the appellant nor the leave was granted on the point, however, during the course of arguments for the first time the point was taken up which, merits no consideration and stands repelled. Muhammad Aziz Khan v. United Kashmir Flour Mills (Pvt.) Ltd 2003 SCR 363 (C)
  21. The validity of Ehtesab Bureau Act was not challenged before the High Court as such the High Court has not expressed its wisdom — Held: This point cannot be entertained directly — The relief claimed is premature — Aggrieved party may challenge the legality of the provisions of Ehtesab Bureau Act, 2001 before the High Court — If not satisfied come in appeal before this Court — Case remanded. Ehtesab Bureau AJ&K v. Abdul Razzaq 2004 SCR 64 (C)
  22. Objection not taken in High Court — However, the point goes to the root of the case and relates to jurisdiction of High Court, allowed to argue. AJK BISE Mirpur and 3 others v. Engineer Muhammad Khalid 2004 SCR 136 (B)
  23. If any party has not raised any question of law which goes to the root of the case — Court may allow such point to be raised. Ehtesab Bureau AJ&K v. Muhammad Hanif 2004 SCR 284 (D)
  24. A party can taken new point with the permission of the Court through amendment in the plaint or writ petition — In that case the contesting party has a chance to file written statement — When a new point is raised in the replication the opposite party is deprived of challenging the same — A bar has been laid down in Order VIII rule 9 C.P.C. to that effect. Board of Trustee & another v. Muhammad Azam Durrani 2004 SCR 401 (B)
  25. The law stands settled that a point not taken up in the concise statement cannot be allowed to be argued during arguments for the first time in the Supreme Court. Javaid Mehdi v. Chief Election Commissioner AJ&K & 3 others 2004 SCR 481 (A)
  26. The point not agitated or argued at the time of appeal cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time at the time of hearing of review petition — The scope of review is very limited and is much more narrow that than the appeal — The legal fraternity in future would keep in their mind the law relating to review petition — Review is permissible only when there is a mistake or error apparent on the face of record. Sawar Khan v. Banaras Khan and 2 others 2004 SCR 506 (B)
  27. Question — That the petitioners are old tenants and their long possession has matured into ownership, should have been first mooted before the Custodian, the High Court and then before this Court — The same cannot be raised for the first time in review jurisdiction. Muhammad Bashir & others v. Custodian of Evacuee Property  and others 2006 SCR 97 (B)
  28. When a point has not been raised in the concise statement the same cannot be allowed to be raised during arguments. Rashad Saleem v. Ch. Zafar Iqbal and 10 others 2009 SCR 18 (E)
  29. A point which was not argued in the Service Tribunal and relates to inquiry into facts cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time in Supreme Court. Muhammad Riaz Khan v. Inspector General of Police and 19 others 2010 SCR 131 (A)
  30. The ground of promotion on the basis of district wise seniority for the first time is raised before this Court which has not been raised by the appellant before the Service Tribunal — Held: The question of the determination of seniority on district wise basis is a mixed question of law and facts, which has neither been raised before the Service Tribunal nor the Service Tribunal has recorded any finding on this point, hence the same cannot be allowed to be raised at the belated stage. Shafique Ahmed v. The Hon’ble Chief Justice AJ&K High Court & others 2010 SCR 522 (A)
  31. The point raised was admittedly not raised before the High Court. It was raised for the first time in the petition for leave to appeal and subsequently in the concise statement — At the time of hearing of PLA objection was not raised — Only a request was made that the petition may be treated as an appeal and may be disposed of at an early date. Even, otherwise, the question raised is a pure question of law which relates to the jurisdiction of the Custodian of Evacuee Property. Held: It is consistent with our practice to allow such points to be raised for the first time in the Court. Ch. Muhammad Ibrahim & 4 others v. Rehabilitation Department and others 2010 SCR 466 (A)
  32. The imposition of additional tax for full month or for actual delayed period is a question of law but it was not raised before the Tribunal nor it arises out of the order of the Tribunal, therefore. Held: Cannot be considered by the Court at this stage.  M/S Amin Spinning Mills v. Deputy Collector Central Excise & another 2011 SCR 196 (F)
  33. The point although being a pure legal question but if not raised in the lower forum and the concise statement, cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time at the time of arguments in the Court. Nusrat Jabeen v. Azad Govt. & 7 others 2014 SCR 456 (C)
  34. The appellant has not challenged the appointment order — only challenged the recommendation issued by the PSC in favour of respondent — The prayer made in the memo of appeal and concise statement shows that the appellant has prayed to declare the recommendations made in favour of respondent No.5 for the post of lecturer Physics and his appointment order dated 30.03.2009 — as the appellant has not challenged the appointment order of respondent No.5 in the writ petition, therefore, he cannot challenge the same directly in this Court. Held: Law is settled on the point that if a point has not been taken in the lower forum the same cannot be taken for the first time in this Court. Hafiz M. Abid v. Azad Govt. 2014 SCR 1608 (A) 2012 SCR 196 & 1998 SCR 244. rel
  35. Appeal before Service Tribunal — maintainability — argument that objection regarding maintainability of appeal neither  raised in the Service Tribunal, nor in this Court, therefore, same is not tenable — observed that in case  reported as 2015 SCR 83, no objection regarding maintainability of appeal was raised by the party — while recording the judgment the Court at its own came through the fact that certified copy was not annexed with the memo of appeal in the Service Tribunal which is non-compliance of the mandatory statutory provisions — The Court had observed that although, the objection was not raised, yet held: pure legal question which goes to the root of the case, has come in the notice of the Court and  on the strength of case reported as 1992 SCR 224, the legal question was resolved and it was declared that the appeal in the Service Tribunal was not competently filed. Conservator Forests v. Gulab Ahmed 2016 SCR 73 (A)
  36. Held: any pure legal question which goes to the root of the case can be raised at any stage with the permission of the Court. M. Tahir v. Syed M. Nazar Iqbal & others 2016 SCR 586 (C) Conservator Forests and others vs. Gulab Ahmed (Civil appeal No. 153 of 2015, decided on 21.12.2015) rel.
  37. The point although being a pure legal question but if not raised in the lower forum or in memo of appeal or in the concise statement, cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time at the time of arguments in the Court. Nazia Altaf v. Jameela Yasmin  2016 SCR 577 (B) 2014 SCR 456 rel.
  38. Objection regarding jurisdiction — petitioner contested the suits filed by the respondent before Family Court No.1, Muzaffarabd —he also filed cross suit for restitution of conjugal rights in the same Court and never raised any objection regarding the jurisdiction of the Court. Held:  the point which has not been raised before the lower Courts cannot be agitated in appeal before Supreme Court. Muhammad Khurshid v. Ghulab Jan & 3 others 2016 SCR 447 (A)
  39. —can be raised— which goes to the root cause of the case—-even if not raised in concise statement and before the High Court. Argument: point of non-arraying of necessary party was neither raised in concise statement filed in Supreme Court nor before the High Court, so cannot be raised at the time of arguments. Held: it has no substance as even without raising the point it is the duty of the Court to determine, whether the appeal is competently filed which includes the fulfilment of mandatory statutory requirement such like furnishing certified copies etc., and also impleading necessary parties. Even otherwise, there is no bar on the Court to consider such point at any stage. The preliminary objection raised by the respondent prevails. Sakeena Bibi v. Muhammad Ashiq & others 2017 SCR 242 (B)  1997 SCR 389, 2003 SCR 207 & 2008 SCR 223 rel.
  40. —Section 10(3) of the Establishment of the Office of Mohtasib (Ombudsman) in AJ&K Act, 1992—limitation for filing a complaint before the Mohtasib (Ombudsman) is 3 months—contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that the complaint before the Mohtasib was time barred—Held: that neither any objection regarding limitation was raised before the Mohtasibnor the High Court. This question cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time before this Court. University of AJ&K vs Mohtasib (Ombudsman) 2018 SCR 1257 (A) 2003 SCR 30 ref
  41. —the point agitated is not only legal but also factual in nature—some has neither been specifically raised before reference Judge nor any issued has been framed—this proposition cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time before this Court, especially when it has neither been argued nor raised before Reference Judge or High Court. M. Amin & 3 others v.  Azad Govt. & 23 others2020 SCR 66 (D & E)
  42.  —the question of fact not raised before the lower forum cannot be allowed to be raised before the Supreme Court for the first time. Tabasam Ashraf v. Azad Jammu & Kashmir Govt. & 4 others 2020 SCR 127 (A)
  43.                 See Administration of Criminal Justice Abdul Waheed Khan V. Ehtesab Bureau 2020 SCR 622 (B)
  44. —Petitioners, neither raised the point of limitation in the memo of appeal before the High Court nor argued—the same cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time before Supreme Court.    Public Works Department & 5 others versus Aurangzeb & another 2021 SCR 336 (B)
  45. —A point which is not taken in the pleadings, cannot be made basis for giving relief—a judgment has to be based on pleadings of the parties and a court cannot travel beyond pleadings. Secretary Health & another versus Muhammad Latif & 5 others  2021 SCR  693 (D) 1993 SCR 319 rel.
  46. — A question of law can be raised at any stage —the same can be considered in the light of the facts and circumstances of each case—it is for the Court to decide whether such party can be allowed to raise such question or facts and circumstances of case do not allow to accept even question of law at belated stage. Muhammad Javiad v. Director Sericulture & others 2022 SCR 293 (B)
  47. — The judgment should be based on the pleadings of the parties and the point which has not been raised in the Courts below, cannot be raised for the first time and resolved — Raja Maqeet-ur-Rehman vs Public Service Commission & others 2024 SCR 200 (A) 2002 SCR 66 & 2004 SCR 401 ref.
error: Content is protected !!