Sindh government put on notice on plea against civil court law amendment

The Sindh High Court (SHC) has issued notices to the ministry of law and others on petitions challenging the vires of Sindh Civil Court (Amendment) Act with regard to pecuniary jurisdiction of the district courts in Karachi.

Petitioners Sohail Hameed and Mohammad Ali Lakhani submitted in the petitions that the Article 202 of the Constitution mandated that the high court may make rules regulating the practice and procedure of the high court or any of the subordinate court to it, but this constitutional mandate was subject to the constitution and the law.

They submitted that Sindh Civil Court (Amendment) Act 2025 repealed the Sindh Chief Court Rules (original side) that were made under the Article 202 of the Constitution. They submitted that the impugned legislation was in violation of the Article 202 of the Constitution under which the Sindh High Court under its constitutional mandate had made the Sindh Chief Court Rules.

They submitted that only the high court could establish limitation upon its jurisdiction including by way of pecuniary impositions on the exercise of the jurisdiction. They submitted that the Section 7 of the impugned Act cannot impose upon the original civil jurisdiction admissible to the high court irrespective of the operation as originally framed or as amendment by the impugned Act. They submitted that high court’s original civil jurisdiction was protected under the Article 175(2) of the Constitution.

They submitted that various legal question arose due to impugned legislation as what would be eventual fate of the decrees and orders as case may be proclaimed by the high court in exercise of its civil original jurisdiction and what will be fate of execution proceedings pending in matters where the high court had proclaimed decrees as that impugned Act did not answer or attempt to mitigate these concerns.

They submitted that the impugned Act was also in violation of the Supreme Court’s ruling that clearly concluded that the original civil jurisdiction exercised by the high court was not akin to or borrowed from the original civil jurisdiction admissible to a court of district and sessions.

The petitioners also raised legal and administrative questions over the implementation of the law and submitted that the impugned law was an expression of legislative incompetence and excesses.

The SHC was requested to declare the impugned Act as illegal. A division bench of the SHC headed by Justice Mohammad Faisal Kamal Alam after a preliminary hearing of the petitions issued notices to the ministry of law and others, and called their comments on February 25.