Supreme Court: adjournments are an exception and need real cause, with costs for misuse

Judgment at a glance

Legal issue

Does a counsel's prior personal engagement justify an adjournment before the Supreme Court?

Decision

No. A written request said only that counsel had prior personal engagements. The Court held that such a vague assertion cannot be sufficient cause. The Advocate-on-Record, who was present, was put on notice to argue the matter and did so; the Court found no ground to interfere and dismissed the petition. It then set out the law. Under Order XX Rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules 2025, an adjournment needs a proper application by the Advocate-on-Record, unless a party appears in person. Under Order XXX Part A Rule 3, the Court may impose compensatory costs on the advocate or party where sufficient cause is not shown. The weekly cause list also warns that if counsel cannot appear, the Advocate-on-Record must argue the case. The Court recorded that 653 adjournments were sought by advocates between January and March 2026, called the practice wholly unacceptable, and put the Bar on notice that future non-compliant requests will invite consequences, including compensatory costs.

Key principle

An adjournment is an exception at the Court's discretion, not an entitlement; the unavailability or convenience of an individual counsel is not in itself sufficient cause, and the Advocate-on-Record remains responsible for arguing the matter.

Outcome

Dismissed

Relevant law

Supreme Court Rules 2025, O. XX r. 2; Supreme Court Rules 2025, O. XXX Part A r. 3; Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Art. 10-A

Why it matters

• Litigants: ask who will argue your case if your senior counsel is unavailable on the hearing date.
• Advocates: an adjournment application must come from the Advocate-on-Record and show sufficient cause.
• Unjustified adjournment requests now risk compensatory costs in the Supreme Court.

Cite as: Abbas Ali Shah v. Misha Zeb Khan etc., Supreme Court of Pakistan, Civil Petition No. 245 of 2026, decided 2 April 2026

Copy citation Print summary