Restoration of Case

  1. Sufficient cause for non appearance — the petitioner has taken the only ground that due to earning the livelihood, he could not appear before the Court.  He has failed to show any sufficient cause for restoration of the case.  Held: it is almost settled that if the petitioner claiming the restoration of any case he has to show the sufficient cause— the petitioner firstly failed to appear before the High Court in writ petition which was dismissed for non-prosecution.  He filed an application for restoration of the writ petition but once again he failed to appear, thus, the same was dismissed for non-prosecution. The petitioner filed another application for restoration of the writ petition as well as the application for restoration of the same but he failed to show any sufficient cause for his non-appearance before the Court.  The conduct of the petitioner shows serious negligence and lack of interest in prosecuting the case. Further held:  the petitioner does not deserve for any relief.  M. Siddique v. Azad Govt. & others 2016 SCR 471 (A) 2009 SCR 14 & Farkhanda Jabeen & 95 others vs. Azad Govt. & 58 others (Civil Misc. No. 240 of 2015, decided on 19.11.2015)rel.
  2. —Reason assigned in support of restoration application not sufficient—sufficient cause is one which is beyond the control of a party. Khizar Umar Khan Versus Azad Govt. & 14 others 2021 SCR 244 (A &B) 2005 SCR 23 rel.
  3. — Parties are bound to appear before the Court on the date of hearing—if a party fails to appear due to unavoidable circumstances or the reason beyond its control, the case may be restored if sufficient cause is shown. Mavish Shafi Versus Public Service Commission & 3 others 2021 SCR 354 (A)
  4. —When a case is dismissed in default of appearance of a party or his counsel, the party is duty bound to show sufficient cause— only the circumstances beyond the control of the party or his counsel, can be considered to be a sufficient cause for restoration of a case. Muhammad Jamil Versus Public Service Commission & others 2021 SCR 571 (A)
  5. —it is necessary for the concerned party to satisfy the Court that there was sufficient cause or unavoidable circumstances for his absence on the relevant date. Muhammad Jamil Versus Public Service Commission & others 2021 SCR 571 (C)
  6. —restoration of case—law relieves restoration of the case only in unavoidable circumstances. Muhammad Jamil Versus Public Service Commission & others 2021 SCR 571  (D) PLJ 2000 SC(AJ&K) 359, 2002 SCR 100 & 2005 SCR 23 rel.
  7. —affidavit—not rebutted—case restored—see Mst. Maroof Jan & another VersusMuhammad Zaheen 2021 SCR 665 (A)
  8. — application for restoration of writ filed after a period of 04 months — no sufficient explanation has been furnished, which may be considered as a sufficient cause — sufficient cause is one which is beyond the control of a party. Azad Govt. & others versus Muhammad Shabir Khan & others 2023 SCR 816 (B) 2022 SCR 273 ref.
error: Content is protected !!