Malik law Chamber Chunian

13/10/2024

وراثت کے معاملات میں بھی #قانون معیاد سماعت کا اطلاق ہوتا ہے
The law of limitation is founded on the principle of "Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt," meaning "the law assists the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights." This principle forms a cornerstone of justice, reinforcing that the law favors those who act promptly and diligently. It emphasizes that individuals must be active in asserting their rights and those (naeem)who fail to do so within a reasonable time should not expect the courts to intervene in their favor.

Law of limitation is not just a technical formality but a crucial component of a well-functioning legal system. It provides a framework that ensures legal matters are addressed promptly, preventing evidence from being lost, memories from fading, and facts from becoming distorted over time. Furthermore, it protects potential defendants from (naeem)being subjected to claims long after they could reasonably expect such challenges, fostering certainty and finality in legal matters. By requiring claimants to act within a specific period, the law promotes diligence and responsibility in the pursuit of legal remedies. Those who neglect to assert their rights, as in this case, effectively forfeit their ability to challenge matters that could have been addressed much earlier.

In the present case, the petitioner's inaction for over 27 years clearly demonstrates a failure to uphold this principle. The law of limitation exists to prevent precisely this kind of neglect, ensuring that claims are brought forth when evidence is fresh and facts are clear. To allow this claim after such an extraordinary delay would not only undermine the integrity of the legal (naeem)system but would also set a dangerous precedent, suggesting that legal rights can be asserted at any time, regardless of the passage of decades.

C.P.L.A.1182-L/2018 Akhtar Nasir Ahmed v. Province of Punjab through District Collector Gujrat & others
Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi
09-10-2024

13/10/2024

17/09/2024

نابالغ کےنان و نافقہ کے کیس میں یہ نابالغ کی نہیں، بلکہ اسکے باپ کی زمہ داری ہے کہ وہ ثابت کرے کہ اسکی Financial Capacity کتنی ہے ۔۔ اگر وہ ثابت نہ کرے تو یہ اسکے خلاف جاے گا

2023 CLC 161

Judgment/order passed with consent of the parties could not be challenged by any of the parties.

Presumption of regularity is attached to all judicial and official acts, which include orders of courts and the same also finds support from the illustration (e) attached to Article 129 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 which provides that Court may presume that judicial and official acts have been regularly performed.

It is settled by now that the minor could not be burdened with onus to prove the financial status and payment capacity of his father to be held entitled to maintenance allowance rather it was for the father to prove his financial sources which, if he fails to prove, inference is to be drawn against him.

The maintenance for past six years could be allowed by the Family Court as a suit for maintenance allowance would be governed by the residuary Article 120 of the Schedule attached to the Limitation Act, 1908 providing limitation of six years.

It is settled position of law that the interim maintenance allowance paid during the pendency of the suit in compliance of orders passed by the court is to be adjusted from the amount determined in the final decree.