Costs on frivolous cases. Supreme court case law.

سپریم کورٹ آف پاکستان میں کیس C.P.L.A. نمبر 3300/2024 میں اسلام آباد ہائی کورٹ کے 02.07.2024 کے فیصلے کے خلاف درخواست دائر کی گئی۔ درخواست گزار، آسمہ حلیم، نے جائیداد کے تنازعہ کے سلسلے میں ہائی کورٹ کے فیصلے کے خلاف اپیل کی درخواست دی تھی۔ سپریم کورٹ نے درخواست کو بے بنیاد اور پریشان کن قرار دیتے ہوئے مسترد کر دیا اور 50,000 روپے کے اخراجات کی ادائیگی کا حکم دیا۔ عدالت نے بے بنیاد مقدمات کی وجہ سے عدالتی نظام پر پڑنے والے بوجھ کا بھی تذکرہ کیا اور اس قسم کی سرگرمیوں کو روکنے کی ضرورت پر زور دیا تاکہ عدلیہ میں کیسز کی جلد سماعت ممکن ہو سکے۔

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

Present:

Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah

Mr. Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan

Mr. Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan

C.P.L.A. No. 3300 of 2024

(Against the judgment of Islamabad High Court,

Islamabad dated 02.07.2024 passed in C.R. No. 111/2023)

Asma Haleem

…Petitioner

Versus

Abdul Haseeb Chaudhry and others

…Respondents

For the Petitioner(s):

Mr. Abdul Wahid Qureshi

Mr. Tariq Aziz, AOR

For the Respondent(s): Not represented

Date of hearing:

30.07.2024

ORDER

Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, J. – Brief facts of the case are that

the petitioner filed a suit for partition, permanent, possession,

permanent and mandatory injunction regarding the built-up property

constructed house two floors over land measuring 1 Kanal numbered as

Plot No. 7-M, Raja Akhtar Road, Korang Valley, Shahpur, Barakahu,

Islamabad. The suit property was owned by the father of the parties and

after necessary proceedings, the trial court issued a preliminary decree

vide order dated 13.01.2020 and appointed a local commission.

Subsequently, reserve price of the suit property was fixed by the trial

court which was objected by the petitioner on 16.03.2020. Thereafter, a

court auctioneer was appointed by the trial court who conducted the

auction proceedings and submitted his final report to the court on

18.03.2023 which was also objected by the petitioner. The said

objections were turned down by the trial court vide order dated

12.04.2023 against which the petitioner preferred an appeal which was

allowed vide order dated 08.07.2023. A revision petition was filed by the

respondent No. 7 before the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad which was

allowed vide judgment dated 02.07.2024 (“impugned judgment”). Hence,

the instant petition for leave to appeal.

C.P.L.A. No. 3300/2024

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at some

length and have gone through the impugned judgment of the High Court,

examined the law on the subject and the record of the case. We have not

been able to take any exception to the impugned judgment and are of the

view that the present petition is completely frivolous and vexatious and

the process of the court has been abused by the petitioner just to

pressurize the other side and delay the matter on one pretext or the

other, thereby depriving her siblings and mother from the lawful auction

of the said suit property. Therefore, it does not warrant any interference.

Before parting with this Order, it is significant to highlight

that according to the statistics provided by the Law & Justice

Commission of Pakistan, there are about 2.2 million (2,255,295) cases

pending before all courts in the country.1 Such frivolous, vexatious and

speculative litigation unduly burdens the courts giving artificial rise to

pendency of cases which in turn clogs the justice system and delays

the resolution of genuine disputes. Such litigation is required to be

rooted out of the system and strongly discouraged and one of the ways

to curb such practice of instituting frivolous and vexatious cases is by

imposing of costs under Order XXVIII, Rule 3 of the Supreme Court

Rules, 1980 which lay the foundation for expeditious justice and

promote a smart legal system, enhancing access to justice by

entertaining genuine claims.2 In view of the aforesaid, leave is,

therefore, declined and this petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.

50,000/- to be paid to the respondents and in case of its failure, the

same shall be recoverable as a money decree. Copy of this Order be

dispatched to the respondents for information.

Judge

Islamabad

30 July 2024

Approved for Reporting

Sadaqat/Umer A. Ranjha, LC

Judicial Statistics, 2nd Bi-Annual Report (July-December 2023), Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan

< http://www.ljcp.gov.pk/reports/bar.pdf> accessed 01 August, 2024.

2 Qazi Naveed ul Islam v. District Judge, Gujrat, PLD 2023 SC 298; National Highway Authority v. Sambu

Construction, 2023 SCMR 1103.

For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.