Vakalatnama omission in revision petition treated as curable irregularity; filing held within time and maintainable.

Omission to file a vakalatnama with a revision petition at the time of presentation was treated as a curable irregularity, not a defect invalidating the filing. The revision was regarded as a separate proceeding and not a continuation of the suit, and the later filing of the vakalatnama, together with condonation of delay at the stage of admission, supported the view that the petition was within time. The preliminary objection on limitation and maintainability was therefore rejected, and the revision was held maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revision petition was liable to be treated as filed beyond time for want of a vakalatnama at the time of presentation, and whether that omission invalidated the filing.

Analysis: The omission to file the vakalatnama with the revision petition was treated as an irregularity. The revision was held to be a separate proceeding and not a continuation of the suit. The vakalatnama was later filed and the delay was condoned when the revision was admitted. On that basis, the petition was found to have been filed within the prescribed time and the defect was capable of cure.

Conclusion: The preliminary objection was overruled and the revision was held to be maintainable.

---