Note: The figures in the following table only show the number of important Judgements/Orders uploaded on this site. It does not reflect total disposal of the Hon'ble Judges.
Apex Court: Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan, Federal Shariat Court of Pakistan:
| ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S.No. | Citation | Case No. | Case Year | Parties | Bench Type | Order/Judgment | Order_Date | A.F.R | Head Notes/ Tag Line | Bench | Apex Court | Apex Status |
| 1 | Const. P. 273/2009 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2009 | Khair Mohammad Soomro and an other (Petitioner) VS District Nazim Sukkur and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 2 | Suit 448/2007 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2007 | M/s. Universal Freight (Plaintiff) VS M/s. Air France (Decree Holder) | S.B. | Order | 11-JUN-12 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 3 | Suit 1307/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | M/S. HABIB OIL MILLS (PVT) LTD (Plaintiff) VS MR. IRFAN A. IFTIKHAR (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 27-AUG-12 | Yes | the suit of the plaintiff is decreed only in terms of prayer clause (a) however with interest as prescribed under sub rule 2 of Order 37 CPC with cost | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 4 | Const. P. 77/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Pir Bux Abro (Petitioner) VS SIP Haq Nawaz Lolai and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 07-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 5 | Const. P. 2372/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Mst. Zebul Luhur and another (Petitioner) VS SHO PS New Foujdari Shikarpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 29-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 6 | Const. P. 1059/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mst Roman Mangrio (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Market and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 7 | Const. P. 98/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Basran Mirani (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Civil Line and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 8 | Const. P. 175/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Wali Muhammad Abro (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Dokri and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 9 | Const. P. 1015/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Hussain Baloch and others (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Civil Line and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 23-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 10 | Cr.Bail 63/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mumtaz Shaikh and another (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 01-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 11 | Const. P. 986/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Daim Khan Soomro (Petitioner) VS PO Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 12 | Cr.Bail 363/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Gulab Dahani (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 13 | Const. P. 113/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Jamaluddin Bangulani (Petitioner) VS PO Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 14 | Const. P. 112/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Khalid Hussain Bugti (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Civil Line and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 15 | Const. P. 142/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Miss Naheed Munwar (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 16 | Cr.Misc. 195/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mandhro Jaiffri (Petitioner) VS The SHO PS Karan Sharif and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 04-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | Crl.P.15-K/2013 Qurban Ali v. The State and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed Dismissed | ||
| 17 | Cr.Acq.A. 117/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Anwar Ali Nohri (Appellant) VS The State and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 17-OCT-12 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 18 | Const. P. 747/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mst Shahzadi Khatoon Gaincho (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Warah and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 19 | Const. P. 949/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Zainal Abden Sarki (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Civil Line Jacobabad and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 20 | Const. P. 980/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Muhammad Ali Khero (Petitioner) VS PO Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 21 | Cr.Bail 218/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2010 | Ghulam Shabir @ Shabir Ahmed (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 22 | Cr.Bail 318/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mehmood Soomro (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 23 | Cr.Bail 500/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Sajjad Ali Chandio (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 24 | Cr.Bail 84/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Muhammad Ali Brohi (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 25 | Civil Revision 36/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Abdul Wahab Brohi (Applicant) VS Nasir Ali and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | ||||
| 26 | Cr.Bail 675/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Shoukat Ali alias Barkat (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 12-OCT-12 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 27 | Civil Revision 318/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | Jethanand (Applicant) VS Mumtaz Ali & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-OCT-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 28 | Const. P. 3525/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Abdul Latif Narejo and Ors (Petitioner) VS E.O.B.I and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 30-OCT-17 | Yes | Board of Trustees were required to convene a meeting and the petitioners agreed. The petition was disposed off accordingly. It perhaps on an interpretation of order dated 18.12.2017 that the Board of Trustees resolved to approve the upgradation of the petitioner as Executive Director as if it was an order of this Court, which Board of Trustees decision was subsequently withdrawn. The alleged contemnor may have stated that the upgradation was allowed but it was only the statement of the Counsel that was recorded. Neither the withdrawal nor review of earlier decision taken in 118th Meeting could constitute contempt as there was no straightaway direction for up-gradation of the post from Assistant Director to Executive Director. The issue was to be resolved by the Board of Trustees of EOBI | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author) | C.P.431/2018 Employees Old Age Benefits Institution thr. its Chairman, Karachi & others v. Abdul Latif Narejo & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed as Withdrawn | |
| 29 | Const. P. 1357/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2017 | Shrimati Aashi (Petitioner) VS Bhesham Lal & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-SEP-17 | Yes | This Proviso is primarily is in consideration of the fact that Muslim women who file their respective suits for dissolution of marriages and dower amount shall also be in a position to avail the jurisdiction of local limits where the (wife) ordinarily resides but that doesn???t exclude the jurisdiction of the above two situations i.e. (a) and (b). | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 30 | H.C.A 7/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Tharparkar Sugar Mills Limited (Appellant) VS Bankers Equity Limited (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 04-JUN-14 | Yes | "Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss. 27 & 22---Interpretation of S.27 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Suit for recovery was decreed in terms of compromise between the parties, and subsequently, the defendant filed another suit seeking to take advantage of a State Bank Circular---Contention of the defendant was inter alia, that till such time the proceedings of the second suit culminate, status quo with regard to mortgaged property had to be maintained---Held, defendant had sought indirect relief for setting aside or modification of the judgment and decree passed in the first suit, against which defendant had not filed appeal and decree had obtained finality---Under S.27 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 no court or authority was prohibited to revise, recall, call or permit or call into question the judgment and decree of Banking Court or the legality or propriety of anything done by the Banking Court, subject to provisions of S.22 of the Ordinance---Legislature in its anxiety to protect orders of the Banking Court had gone to the extent of ordaining that no authority other than the appellate forum shall even allow to throw a challenge to the validity of orders of the Banking Court and the same could not be assailed before any forum except by the way of appeal---Only possibility in which an injunction or restraining orders against execution of decree and sale of mortgaged property could be granted, would be on the presumption that decree in the first suit might be modified, altered and or set aside, which could not be presumed under provisions of S.27 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001--- Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.311-K/2013 M/s Tharparkar Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Bankers Equity Ltd. and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | |
| 31 | 2018 YLR 2337 | Const. P. 1862/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | M/S Dewan Sugar Mills Limited (Petitioner) VS M/S Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt) ltd & (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 04-DEC-17 | Yes | Ousting the petitioner from availing their remedy which they could have before the executing Court amounts to a denial of fair trial. I am in agreement that such a compromise ought to have been recognized by executing Court, however whether tenant can still make an attempt to have it recognized or otherwise, the jurisdiction vest with the executing Court to be exercised first and I refrain from passing on my observation as it may prejudice the case of parties | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.69-K/2018 Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. v. Dewan Sugar Mills Ltd. and others,C.P.60-K/2018 Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. v. Dewan Sugar Mills Ltd. and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending ,Pending Converted into Appeal and Allowed |
| 32 | Judicial Companies Misc. 31/2000 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2000 | Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan (Applicant) VS M/s Baig Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 10-FEB-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 33 | R.A (Civil Revision) 41/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2010 | Muhammad Soomar Danwar (Applicant) VS Allah Rakhio and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-MAR-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 34 | Const. P. 1359/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Yousuf Thr Attorney Muhammad Shahid (Petitioner) VS Kashif Muhammad Baig & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-AUG-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.81-K/2018 Kashif Muhammad Baig and others v. Muhammad Yousuf and others,C.P.1098-K/2018 Kashif Muhammad Baig and others v. Muhammad Yousuf and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed,Pending Leave Granted | ||
| 35 | Const. P. 3036/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2015 | Mir Muhammad Khan (Petitioner) VS Government of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 36 | 2020 SBLR Sindh 232 | Const. P. 233/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Muhammad Aslam (Petitioner) VS Mst. Fozia Aqeel Zaheer Lari and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 08-JAN-18 | Yes | The personal bona fide need of the landlord/landlady is measured on the basis of a gauge which is dependent upon consistent and conscious inspiring evidence and the existence of such evidence provides presumption as to existence of genuineness unless evidence contrary to such bona fide requirement is available. The touchstone provided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court in such circumstances is that the landlord/landlady should be expressive as to the insufficiency of space already in possession. She may have obtained possession of any adjacent premises under section 14 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 but bona fide requirement of subject shop is to be determined on the basis of available evidence. The bona fide requirement also get disturbed or shaken when the landlady was found to have let out other premises or found to have handed over possession of the premises, which was the subject matter of connected rent application, wherein the very premises required for personal need (as could be ascertained from evidence) was handed over to other tenant irrespective of the fact if it was acquired under 14 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.104-K/2018 Mst: Fozia Aqeel Zaheer Lari v. Muhammad Aslam and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of |
| 37 | Const. P. 1452/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Eng. Nizamuddin (Petitioner) VS Dr. Shakeela Qazi & Another (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 07-NOV-17 | Yes | The provisio of aforesaid Rules provided additional room for the subject cause to file a suit for dissolution of marriage and dower amount within the local limits where wife ordinarily resides. It is distinguished from rest of the jurisdiction wherein the parties were last resided and/or where cause wholly or in part has arisen. While applying the said Rule a suit for dissolution of marriage by way of ???Khulla??? can be filed at the address where wife ordinarily resides at the time of filing suit. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.11-K/2018 Engineer Nizamuddin v. Dr.Shakeela Qazi and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | |
| 38 | Const. P. 864/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Muhammad Sohail (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-JAN-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 39 | Const. P. 3825/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2015 | Ali Nawaz Kalwar (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 40 | 2017 CLD 1256 | Suit 4-B/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Habib Metropolitan Bank (Plaintiff) VS M/s. Dagra Textile (Pvt.) Ltd. & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 11-APR-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | |||
| 41 | Const. P. 1180/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Mst Farzana Panhwar (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 42 | Const. P. 1343/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2015 | Muhammad Hamzo Buriro (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 43 | Const. P. 929/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Mst Anwar Khatoon (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 44 | Const. P. 115/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2019 | Bilal Ahmed Dreho (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 45 | Const. P. 1394/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Ajeeb-u-Rehman Malano & others (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 46 | Const. P. 1670/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Ayaz Hussain Mangi (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 47 | Const. P. 561/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Pandi Khan Pathan (Petitioner) VS Fed; Of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 48 | Const. P. 2918/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2015 | Mehmood (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 49 | Civil Revision 105/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2010 | Ghulam Rasool Abbasi & others (Applicant) VS Mian Himat Ali & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 01-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 50 | Const. P. 670/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Abdul Ghaffar (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 51 | Civil Revision 196/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2010 | Muhammad Hassan and others (Applicant) VS Muhammad Sulleman and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 31-AUG-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 52 | Const. P. 744/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Muhammad Ali Bayo (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 53 | Const. P. 1896/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Majid Ali Ghanghro (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 54 | Const. P. 2174/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Shamsheer Security Guards (Pvt.) Ltd. (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Manik Chowdhary & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 20-AUG-18 | Yes | It was a burden upon the petitioner/tenant to establish that rent for the month of November 2007 onwards was paid in any form which burden was not discharged. In fact the suggestion that respondents refused to receive the rent w.e.f. November 2007, as borne out from the cross-examination of the petitioner, it becomes toothless defence that rent of the subject period was paid. Though this evidence was not discussed by the appellate Court yet in the ultimate paragraph it was observed that the evidence was not perused by the Rent Controller and rightly so. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 55 | Const. P. 2253/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Nawaz Ali (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 56 | Const. P. 3452/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Naveed Haryah (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 57 | I. A 44/2004 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2004 | Hafiz Prof. Abdul Ghaffar (Appellant) VS The Assistant Commissioner & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 25-SEP-18 | Yes | The land acquisition proceedings commenced well before 1997 and 1998 and the appellants originally were not made party to the proceedings. The dispute in the shape of Suit No.108/1996 was pending adjudication between private parties which was resolved somewhere in December 2002 as informed. This question of such references being barred by time was considered by different benches having their independent views, however, this question was ultimately set at rest by Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Government of West Pakistan (Now Government of N.W.F.P.) through Collector, Peshawar v. Arbab Haji Aimed Ali Jan and others reported in PLD 1981 Supreme Court 516. The Hon???ble Supreme Court, in the aforesaid judgment, examined the judgment of the Full Bench of Peshawar High Court in appeal. The Full Bench of Peshawar High Court was of the view that it is the reference of the Collector which invests the Court with necessary jurisdiction to enquire into objections mentioned in Section 19 of the Act and not the objection application filed by an interested person before the Collector. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | |||
| 58 | Const. P. 3338/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Siraj Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 59 | Const. P. 748/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Irfan Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 60 | Const. P. 4921/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Asif Ali Dharejo (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 61 | Const. P. 1168/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Niaz Hussain (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 62 | Const. P. 2272/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Sardar Ali Shah (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 63 | Const. P. 658/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Abdul Ghafar Gadani (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 64 | Const. P. 677/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Shoukat Ali (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 65 | Const. P. 2194/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Sher Muhammad & others (Petitioner) VS Mazhar Ali S/o Mir Muhammad & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 66 | Const. P. 77/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Haji Abdul Ghaffar (Petitioner) VS Head Master Govt Primary School Bhutta Road Suk (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 02-OCT-18 | Yes | ence, it could be safely observed that the pleadings of the plaint do support the proposed amendment sought by the petitioner. In the same way, will not change the nature and complexion of the suit. Had the proposed amendment be not supported by the pleadings in terms of Para 6 as well as in terms of prayer clause ???A???, it could be a possibility that nature and complexion of the suit may have been altered by introduction of these impugned, proposed amendments, but that is not the case here. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | |||
| 67 | Const. P. 197/2011 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2011 | Miss Hina and an other (Petitioner) VS District Accounts Officer Sukkur and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 27-NOV-18 | Yes | Since possibility of competence of appointed candidates, as claimed by them, cannot be brushed aside straight-away as they have been serving since seven years nor it would be in the interest of justice to deprive petitioners of their undeniable rights to have fair-competition. Therefore, to ensure a balance, we do not find it proper to order for fresh process of recruitment by re-advertisement. We find it in all fairness to provide a fair-opportunity of proving their eligibility only to those, who, having eligibility, to test the competence. Worth to add that fresh advertisement would make it open for all, eligible today, which may result in prejudicing the eligibility of those, who otherwise were eligible at such time (about seven years ago). Thus, in short, fresh competition amongst those who appeared earlier could be the best solution that we have for them. Needless to add that if they (private respondents) are and were competent they would sail and, if not, will sink and in such eventuality they would not press application of Locus poenitentiae with reference to their length of service because legally seven years of service cannot overshadow the non-transparent and deceitful recruitment process as same was / is nothing but a premium, being given to them, on account of a cheating undertaken by the officials who conducted the recruitment process. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | C.P.17-K/2019,C.P.1469-K/2018,C.P.4857/2018,C.P.4654/2018,C.A.1190/2019,C.A.1194/2019,C.A.1189/2019,C.A.1191/2019 SCP | Pending Leave Granted.to be fixed after Summer vacation,Pending Leave Granted.to be fixed after Summer vacation,Pending Leave Granted.to be fixed after Summer vacation,Pending Leave Granted.to be fixed after Summer vacation,Pending ,Pending ,Pending ,Pending | |
| 68 | Const. P. 351/2008 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2008 | Hindu Welfare Association Gambat (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-DEC-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 69 | Const. P. 2356/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Masood Ahmed Jatoi (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 70 | Const. P. 133/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Khalid Malik (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 71 | Const. P. 229/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Atique-ur-Rehman (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 72 | Const. P. 2870/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2015 | Mushtaque Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Mumtaz Ahmed and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-OCT-18 | Yes | The grounds assigned by the appellate Court while allowing the application under Order VII Rule 11 does not germane to the requirement for rejecting of plaint under Order VII Rule 11. This is no ground that the petitioner was not in possession of the suit property since last so many years. It is also immaterial that the father has not challenged the title of his own son / sons during his lifetime. This is not disputed that the property was purchased at the time when these claimants from whom respondent No.14 has acquired the property now were only minors. It is also not denied that there is no such specific denial as far as alleged rights of the petitioner are concerned as merely in possession of the suit property does not mean that the rights of the petitioner were also denied. At the most the right of the petitioner could be said to have been denied prima facie, when an attempt was made to execute the sale deed in favour of respondent No.14 Mst. Hina Perveen which was the right accrued to the petitioner to file a suit to seek declaration as made in the plaint, hence this is a case of conflicting findings of two courts below. The reasoning and findings assigned by the appellate Court insofar as rejection of plaint is concerned, is not sustainable under the law. The appellate Court???s order is set aside, however, this being a mixed question of law and fact, trial Court is directed to frame issues amongst others and this being a preliminary issue, parties be directed to record evidence on this issue as well as on other issues as and when framed by the trial Court, however, since the matter is pending for quite some time, we expect that the trial Court shall conclude the trial and pronounce the judgment preferably in four (04) months with compliance report to Additional Registrar of this Court. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | |||
| 73 | Const. P. 2108/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Muhammad Zahid Hussain (Petitioner) VS Mst Kausar Parveen & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 17-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 74 | Const. P. 479/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Mai Kalsoom Paliyo (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 75 | 2019 YLR 2500, 2019 SBLR Sindh 1096 | Const. P. 922/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Capri Autos (Petitioner) VS Dr. Masuma Hasan & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 11-JUN-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.907-K/2018 Dr. Masuma Hasan v. Capri Autos Motor Cycle Dealer and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | |
| 76 | Const. P. 1055/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Mst Tahira Farooque Awan (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 77 | II.A. 7/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2014 | Muhammad Haroon and others (Appellant) VS V/S Qaimkhani Welfare Society and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 03-FEB-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 78 | Civil Revision 203/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2009 | Gul Sher (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 17-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 79 | 2021 PCr.LJ 1270 | Const. P. 2147/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Abdul Ghafar S/o Noor Muhammad (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 17-MAR-20 | Yes | Every disease, if not attended properly, would cause negative and hazardous effect to life but it doesn???t mean that its medical remedy is bail from the recovery of such diseases. His treatment in a best available hospital under a care of best team of doctors could serve the best option. These stresses and pressures discussed could only be ruled out if a patient remains away from all these stresses and strains and the best possible place for the prescribed health issues is a Hospital where a patient could be treated free from all such stress possibilities. Post Arrest Bail Application on medical ground dismissed in view of the recommendations of the Medical Board | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam | C.P.363-K/2020 Abdul Ghaffar v. Federation of Pakistan & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of |
| 80 | Const. P. 6183/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Abdul Hakeem (Petitioner) VS Provincial Ombudsman (Mohtasib) Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-JAN-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 81 | Const. P. 3461/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Shehzadi Erum (Petitioner) VS M.S Leprosy Hospital and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-AUG-21 | Yes | review application | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | |||
| 82 | Civil Revision 139/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | Haji Muhammad Ismail Qureshi (Applicant) VS Mst: Ramzano and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 83 | 2022 PLC CS 197 | H.C.A 163/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | National Refinery Ltd. & another (Appellant) VS Syed Niaz Ahmed (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 07-NOV-19 | Yes | The terms of the service were ensured at the time of his (respondent's) transfer, which cannot be lifted unilaterally depriving an employee of his post-retirement benefits or any of the terms of transfer, to which he was entitled at the time when he was inducted/transferred. The transfer confirmation letter dated 08.03.1992 does suggest variance in Scheme for employees but the boards decision has prospective application as far as lifting of any beneficial arrangements are concerned. Wisdom should have prevailed at the time when employees were being transferred and not at the twilight of their career when they (employees) only hoped to get their retirement benefits.. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry | C.P.711-K/2019 National Refinery Ltd another v. Syed Niaz Ahmed Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed |
| 84 | Const. P. 2655/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Khadim Hussain (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-MAR-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 85 | Const. P. 750/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Total Parco Pakistan Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 28-NOV-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 86 | Criminal Appeal 43/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2015 | Naveed (Appellant) VS The State (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-NOV-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 87 | Const. P. 6105/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Fine Star Ind Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 88 | Const. P. 1704/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | G.S Fashion (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 89 | Const. P. 1733/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Al-Raheem Textile (Pvt) Ltd and Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 90 | Const. P. 4804/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/S Jabbar Steel Industries (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 91 | Const. P. 5162/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Atlas Battery Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 92 | Const. P. 2938/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Asif Ashfaq (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 93 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 6/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Al-Hamra Trading Company (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 94 | Const. P. 3934/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Fazaia Housing Scheme Karachi (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 95 | Const. P. 4099/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Habib Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 96 | Const. P. 4773/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Crown Feed (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 97 | Const. P. 8259/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | New Hampshire Insurance Co. (Petitioner) VS S.R.B and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 98 | Cr.Bail 1570/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | ZAFAR ALI MAGSI S/O FAZAL MUHAMMAD (Applicant) VS THE STATE (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-MAY-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 99 | Const. P. 5445/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Iqbal Khalid Tabba (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 100 | Const. P. 5292/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Saeed Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 101 | Const. P. 1020/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Liberty Power Tech Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 102 | Const. P. 2943/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Shaikh Pipe Mills (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 103 | Const. P. 5564/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Al Hafi and Co. (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 104 | Const. P. 845/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Asian Impex (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 105 | Const. P. 4988/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Al-Mashood Oil & Ghee Ind (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 106 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 124/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Collector of Customs MCC (Applicant) VS M/s. Java enterprises and other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 107 | Const. P. 3925/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Raja Steel (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 108 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 742/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Qamar & Co. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 109 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 488/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Abdul Rauf (Applicant) VS Member Judicial Customs Appellate Tribuna & anor (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 110 | Const. P. 4266/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Premier Mercantile Services Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 111 | Const. P. 4989/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Syed Khurram Hussain Naqvi and Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 112 | Const. P. 8809/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Dr. Syed Shah Faisal and Ors (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 113 | Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 16/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Getz Pharma (Pvt) Ltd. (Applicant) VS Commissioner Inland Revenue Zone-I & another (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 114 | Const. P. 2096/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | N & N Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 115 | 2022 PTD 390, 2022 PTCL 396 | Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 104/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Commissioner I-R Zone-I (Applicant) VS M/s. Faizan Steel (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-OCT-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.1679-K/2021 Commissioner Inland Reveue v. M/s. Faizan Steel Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Notice | |
| 116 | Const. P. 5933/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mirpurkhas Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 117 | Const. P. 4276/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Bed & Blanket (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 118 | Const. P. 4916/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Safdar Ali (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 119 | Const. P. 5760/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | HRSG Recruiting (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 120 | Const. P. 785/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Muhammad Shakir S/o Muhammad Ismail (Petitioner) VS M/s. United Bank Limited and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 121 | Const. P. 5810/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Yasir Mumtaz (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 122 | Const. P. 6093/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Adam Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 123 | Const. P. 3344/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s The Legend (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 124 | Const. P. 1737/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Mohsin Metal Works (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 125 | Const. P. 4440/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Murshid Builders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 126 | Const. P. 2967/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Safa Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 127 | Const. P. 5038/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Zameer Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 128 | F.R.A 10/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Aamir Rafat Siddiqui Thr. Attorney Mrs. Sadia Aami (Appellant) VS The VIIIth Senior Civil Judge, Khi South & another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-MAR-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 129 | Const. P. 5409/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Bulls & Bulls (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 130 | 2022 PTD 8 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 424/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Collector of Customs MCC (Applicant) VS Syed Javed Ahmed & another (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-SEP-21 | Yes | The Tribunal has also laid reliance on Rule 17 of the Baggage Rules, 2006 which provides that the goods brought in commercial quantity shall be allowed release only on payment of duty and taxes at the statutory rates and redemption fine equal to thirty per cent of the value of the goods in terms of the Notification No.SRO 547(1)/2005 dated 06th June, 2005 wherein fine was subsequently reduced by a following SRO in 2009. Thus in view of the definition of Section 2(s) of the Customs Act, 1969 the commercial quantity of silver jewelry does not fall in any prohibition or restriction clause unless proved otherwise. The SRO 499(1)/2009 also allow commercial quantity baggage to be released on taxes or redemption fine. In view of Section 139 of the Customs Act, 1969 we are of the view that the passenger was at liberty to declare such contents of his baggage orally which he did as disclosed in the impugned order and such facts cannot be re-appreciated while hearing reference | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||
| 131 | 2019 PTD 347 | Suit 1763/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Umer Spinniing Mills (Pvt) Ltd., & Others. (Plaintiff) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 05-SEP-16 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 132 | Const. P. 5610/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Spectrum Enterprises & Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 133 | Const. P. 321/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Shafiq Ahmed S/o Shabbir Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Iftikhar Hussain Qureshi and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-APR-21 | No | Petitioner was inducted in the premises as tenant. He claimed to be in relation with the brother of respondent No.1 Iftikhar Hussain Qureshi as landlord/ tenant who sold this property to his brother. The status of the petitionerwith regard to premises in question would thus remain as a tenant. Petitioner has claimed that no notice under section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was served however he concedes that despite receipt of notice of eviction application and the documents,he did not tender the rent to the new landlordi.e. respondent No.1. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 134 | Const. P. 4784/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Haji Nazir Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 135 | 2021 CLC 1931 | M.A. 3/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s. Jiangsu Dajin Heavy Industry Co. Limited (Appellant) VS Port Qasim Authority (PQA) and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 03-JUN-21 | Yes | - Indeed, it appears that it was more than a month after opening of the bid that the appellant made an attempt to rectify its material inability by furnishing a separate/counter bank guarantee from Bank AlHabib for both the tenders. This deficiency could not have been resurrected as by then the ship sailed. These belated attempts would have amounted to a modification of the tender documents, which is not permissible under Rule 31 of Rules 2004. Eventually only those whose technical bids were found to be in consonance with the terms of the invitation, were liable to be considered for further steps and were considered accordingly. -Petitioner being aware of the said tender conditions participated and having participated in the tender cannot challenge or dislike prerequisites meant for technical qualification. He could only expect judicious treatment within the playing rules however, it was too late for appellant when it realized that playing conditions were not palatable to it. The situation faced by appellant based on the aforesaid facts is not res integra as a number of judgments are in the filed covering the issue as settled law. - Even if I have to measure bidding terms on the touchstone of malice and mala fide, I would come out with understanding that these terms are for every one and not to exclude anyone. These are commercial transactions and decisions in this regard should base on strict compliance of terms of tenders whereas equity and fair play based on financial offer is not primary concern. Even if someone intends to impress by showing better financial offer, he has to qualify first on technical grounds. It is the overall impact till completion of job that needs serious consideration by procuring agency. Whether a bidder has the ability to deliver as per terms of tenders and having capacity to ensure project???s completion should be the primary concern of procuring agency. There is thus nothing which could lead to conclude that the process ended up in a decision of rejecting technical bid of appellant was flawed. - Any term within frame of law is also not open for a judicial review even under the hierarchy of procurement laws as Rule 25 enables the procuring agency to require bid security not exceeding five per cent of the bid price to be furnished by every bidder and procuring agency may save its effectiveness for a period as they required in terms of Rule 26. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 136 | Const. P. 4792/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s HSJ Metal (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 137 | Const. P. 5286/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s S.M Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 138 | Const. P. 1578/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Majeed & Sons Steel (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 139 | Const. P. 1783/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Noshasba Talat (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 140 | 2014 CLD 1039 | Judicial Companies Misc. 2/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Zafar Iqbal and Others (Applicant) VS Naseem Ahmed and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-MAY-15 | Yes | It is not a question of embarking upon the jurisdiction, but a question which involves adjudication of issues before this Court. The question of overlapping is also not tenable as the title of these shares is not subjudice before Senior Civil Judge at Multan. I may however observe that the District Judge may pass its own independent order and any observation here shall not influence proceedings before any other forum including trial of Suit No.54 of 2013. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 141 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 5/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Al-Hamra Trading Company (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 142 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 196/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | M/s. U.C.C. (Pvt) Ltd. (Applicant) VS Customs Appellate Tribunal & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 143 | Const. P. 1894/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | S.S.G.C Ltd (Petitioner) VS The Registrar of Trade Union and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 22-NOV-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | C.P.4450/2019 M/s Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd, Karachi v. The Registrar of Trade Unions, C/o National Industrial Relations Commission, Islamabad & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | ||
| 144 | Const. P. 4243/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | M.Sabir Ali & Others (Petitioner) VS Fed of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-MAY-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 145 | Const. P. 8126/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Riaz Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 30-SEP-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry | ||||
| 146 | Const. P. 269/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Farrukh Iqbal Mirza S/o Mirza Muhammad Iqbal (Petitioner) VS The Ld. District Judge, Karachi East and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-MAR-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 147 | 2021 MLD 1905 | Const. P. 971/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Habib Bank Ltd. (Petitioner) VS Mst. Neelofar Awan and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 05-MAY-21 | Yes | In view of above I am of the view that tentative rent order should have been complied and for the period of March and April, the tenant/petitioner could have asked for adjustment of half of the rent but this was only possible after compliance and not after defiance. The rent of May/June 2020 was alsonot deposited in time. I do not find any portion of the order to be unlawful and hence the principle that since some portion of the order is not lawful, entire order is to be set aside, is not applicable here. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 148 | Const. P. 550/2007 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2007 | Muhammad Sabir (Petitioner) VS Faiz Ahmed Qureshi & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 29-NOV-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 149 | Const. P. 846/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | Zafar Malik (Petitioner) VS Azhar Abbas Butt & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 09-FEB-18 | Yes | The legislature has limited the definition of personal use of the landlord to the extent of spouse and son and daughter. It thus cannot be extended to use of brother as a personal use. The personal use of the respondent himself was satisfied/proved in CP No.S-846 of 2009 in relation to Rent Case No.103 of 2002, as observed above, however the bona fide of the landlord insofar as other two applications are concerned required a strict test. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 150 | 2021 PTD 1955 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 239/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Lake View Forest (Pvt) Ltd. (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 23-AUG-21 | Yes | -The scheme of the Customs Act reveals that the subject is governed in terms of Section 25 of the Customs Act and in case it could not be determined under Section 25, then the recourse is available by applying valuation ruling if available in terms of Section 25-A whereafter it is finalized under the Customs Act, 1969. After the assessment and the release of the consignment, the goods are made out of any charge of the Customs. In case the aforesaid process is required to be revisited, (in appropriate cases), the mechanism is available under the law such as Section 32, 193 and 195 of the Customs Act, 1969. --The event of post scrutiny of the goods declaration after assessment and release of goods, is not covered by Section 80(3), as undertaken. It is applicable at the time of original checking of the goods declaration in his hands and goods are yet to be assessed and released and not at belated stage when even the goods have been released. This situation (for appropriate cases) is catered by Section 32, 193 and 195 of the Customs Act, 1969 where under a show cause and/or an appeal within 30 days could have been preferred, or the Board or the Collector of Customs or the Collector of Custom (Adjudication) may, within his jurisdiction, call for the examination of the records of any proceedings under the act for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any decision or order passed by a subordinate officer respectively, could have been followed, however, none of them were invoked. Surprisingly the applicant opt to invoke Section 80(3) of the Customs Act which is ???then??? shown to have been followed by consequences. It is thus under above referred provisions when the competent authority is of the view that the assessment was not made in accordance with law, the past and closed transaction could be reopened but not in the manner as done in the instant case. Prima-facie it is neither a case of mis-declaration as correct PCT was claimed by the consignee nor this is a case of mis-declaration in terms of its value declared, to make out a case under Section 32 of the Act. --- Without prejudice applicant???s case is that Section 80(3) of Act was rightly invoked under the given facts and circumstances. In the instant case, if at all, there was any illegality in the assessment of the goods, it could be attributed to the sub-ordinate officers of the Customs and hence the implication of Section 32 of the Customs Act, 1969 would not be attracted to penalize the respondent or their directors. The purported action by Customs was triggered under Section 80(3) of the Customs Act, 1969 does not have a legal cover in view of the goods being out of charge and the recourses which could have been made were under Section 32, 193 and 195 of the Customs Act, 1969 which were not directly invoked. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||
| 151 | Const. P. 5430/2020 (F.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Imad Samad (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | F.B. | Judgement | 10-SEP-21 | Yes | - Import of vintage cars on the strength of SRO No.833(I)/2018 dated 03.07.2018 followed by a decision in the case of Moin Jamal Abbasi in CP No.D-4124 of 2019 reported as 2020 PTD 660. --Full Bench was constituted to consider the question arising out of litigation:- Whether the subject SRO No.833(I)/2018 issued in terms of Section 19 of Customs Act, 1969 can also be treated as SRO issued by the Ministry of Commerce in terms of Section 3 of the Import & Export Control Act, 1950, permitting import of vintage cars which are otherwise not importable as being old and used in terms of the Import Policy Order of both 2016 and 2020. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro | |||
| 152 | Const. P. 4831/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s K.P Services (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 153 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 76/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | The Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Rehman & another (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 154 | Const. P. 8331/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Mehboob Ali and Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 11-OCT-19 | Yes | Regularization Act 2013 does not suggest that all those contractual employees for whom the basic requirements of transparency is not fulfilled, are also entitled to be regularized. Regularization of Ad-hoc or contract employees under Act of 2013 is not open for all those contractual and ad-hoc employees for whom the codel formalities have not been fulfilled thus a competition should have been made available amongst all those who were interested in the appointments on subject posts. We would not approve the process involved in the appointment of petitioners, which could ultimately deprive the eligible and entitled persons of a fair competition and a precedent could be made to cater the system where the appointment of selected persons, can be legitimized. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry | C.P.614-K/2019 Mehboob Ali and others v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | |
| 155 | Suit.B 66/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | ASKARI BANK LTD (Plaintiff) VS MAGNA STEEL (PVT) LTD & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 28-MAR-14 | Yes | The provision of section 9 & 10 of the of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 are mandatory. Upshot of the above discussion is that both leave to defend applications are allowed as prayed. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 156 | II.A. 131/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Kaleemuddin (Appellant) VS Naushaba Mobeen & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-NOV-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 157 | Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 455/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Commissioner Inland Revenue (Applicant) VS M/s. New Allied Electronics Industries (Pvt) Ltd. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-SEP-21 | Yes | Under Customs Act, 1969, Section 79 onwards is a procedure which regulates the import through filing of Goods Declaration along with necessary documents including examination of imported goods and clearance thereof. Such mechanism was adopted and exhausted by the customs when goods declaration was dealt with. The purported allegation of misdeclaration was in fact within the domain and jurisdiction of Collectorate of Customs, which, in case of any controversy, could have retained the consignment/goods for further inquiry or chemical test and determine the duty provisionally till disposal of the inquiry or reassessment. This has not happened in the instant case as had it been a misdeclaration of the goods, the officers concerned may have taken cognizance and could have objected to the assessment in terms of Section 193 and 195 of Customs Act, 1969 read with Section 32 of the said Act. Sales Tax Act, 1990 does not deal with issue of misdeclaration as being dealt with by the customs officials under Customs Act, 1969. Therefore, unless a misdeclaration is established by the customs officials such recourse of recovery of short levy of sales tax could not have been triggered. The dispute of classification was never raised at customs level. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | |||
| 158 | Const. P. 5386/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Galaxy Enterprises and Others (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 159 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 536/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Multan Chemical Ltd. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 160 | Const. P. 638/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Mohan S/o Doonger (Petitioner) VS Mst. Suneeta and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 161 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 207/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Al-Hayat Brothers (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 162 | Const. P. 1465/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | MUHAMMAD ISHAQ KALOTA (Petitioner) VS NAFEES AHMED & OTHERS (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-NOV-17 | Yes | Admission of alleged default by tenant in any previous litigation or even in this case cannot be relied upon. Admission could only be of facts and cannot be of law. The law takes effect when applied on facts. Admission of law, if any, has to pass through the test prescribed and required by law itself. If a person conceded to have defaulted being ignorant of law such is no admission unless approved by law as the law takes its course when applied on facts which may suggest otherwise than what allegedly conceded or admitted in facts | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 163 | Const. P. 1731/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Dr. Kausar Tasneem (Petitioner) VS Habib Muhammad Naseeb & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 19-DEC-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 164 | Const. P. 5189/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mirpurkhas Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 165 | 2017 MLD 249 | J.M 37/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | M/s. Drug Regulatery Agency (Applicant) VS Zam Zam Corporation & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 07-APR-16 | Yes | If the provisions of Section 12(2) CPC are allowed to facilitate a stranger to the suit whose rights have not been affected by the outcome, the provisions are not available for the applicant as otherwise it would open the floodgate of litigation for initiating the proceedings. The application under section 12(2) CPC filed by Saeed Allahwala appears to be misconceived. He may have remedy available with him to initiate proceedings in relation to the warning letter issued but by moving this application he could achieve nothing in this regard. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 166 | Const. P. 1425/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Syed Momin Hussain Shah (Petitioner) VS Chief Collector & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-FEB-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | C.P.604-K/2021 The Model Collectorate of Custom v. Syed Momin Hussain Shah & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | ||
| 167 | Const. P. 988/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Chemifar International (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 168 | Const. P. 4976/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Matool (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 169 | Const. P. 310/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Habib Bank Limited (Petitioner) VS IXth Rent Controller, Khi (Central) & another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 07-APR-21 | Yes | -Since statute does not provide remedy of appeal, this petition has been filed to invoke jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. By dismissal of an application under order VII rule 11 CPC, none of the fundamental right of the petitioner was violated to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. -The whole gummit of the lis is yet to be decided and hence if an appeal against such order could not be maintained, how this alternate recourse be made available, when no fundamental right of the petitioner seems to have been violated. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 170 | Const. P. 631/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Nusrat Hussain @ Shahid Warsi (Petitioner) VS Aal-e- Aba Trust & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 12-APR-18 | Yes | The rent was deposited in the name of two persons i.e. Aale-eAba Trust and as well as previous owner Fayyaz Hussain Qazalbash. This was done after receipt of notice under section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 from new owner i.e. Aale-e-Aba Trust. Despite having knowledge and despite having seen the documents, as the correspondence shows, the tenant/ petitioner without first offering the rent to the respondent No.1 started depositing rent in Misc. Rent Case. This deposit is not a lawful deposit in terms of Section 10(3) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 171 | 2021 CLC 98 | Const. P. 1111/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Nafeesa Begum (Petitioner) VS State Life Insurance Corporation & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 27-JAN-20 | Yes | The expression ???subject to agreement??? is occasionally used in the correspondence exchanged between the parties during contract negotiations. These words denote that the document is not an offer or acceptance and negotiations are still going on. The expression, which may be found similar and closer to the term ???subject to agreement???, is ???without prejudice???, which may not be a synonym but much closer to the essence of expression ???subject to agreement/contract.??? | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 172 | H.C.A 96/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Nazir Ahmed Chandio`` (Appellant) VS Abdul Rehman & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.1093-K/2021 Nazir Ahmed Chandio v. Abdul Rehman & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 173 | Const. P. 6799/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Imtiaz Provisions Store (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 174 | Const. P. 6865/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Agha Steel Ind. Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 175 | 2022 PTD 245 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 335/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS Forte Impex Lahore (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-OCT-21 | Yes | Simply mentioning that there is danger of removal of goods is not sufficient. The officer must state grounds which justify apprehension of danger of such removal and so also information that he received from an individual having name and that the concerned party has taken steps or about to take steps for the removal of the goods. Nothing of such sort is mentioned in the under considered warrant allegedly issued under section 163 of Customs Act, 1969. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||
| 176 | Const. P. 2169/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Everfresh Farms (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 177 | Const. P. 6222/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muna Manzoor Ul Hasan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 178 | Const. P. 276/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Sarfaraz Khan S/o Gulsher Khan (Petitioner) VS Jama Masjid Muhammadi & Madrasah Tehfeesz-ul-Quran (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 12-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.4009/2021 Mst. Nazma Bibi v. Province of Sindh through Secretary Home Department at Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed Disposed of | ||
| 179 | Const. P. 8448/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Ms Mirza Corp (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 180 | Const. P. 2412/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Puma Energy Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.215-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Puma Engery Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 181 | Const. P. 6595/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s MATCO Foods Ltd (Petitioner) VS Commissioner IR (Appeals-II) and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 182 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 170/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Brothers Pen Company (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 183 | Const. P. 7251/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Aitkenstuart Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 184 | Const. P. 2303/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Mysons Engineering System Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 185 | Const. P. 6614/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Basiruddin Omar Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 186 | Const. P. 1631/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Sarfaraz Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 187 | Const. P. 3932/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Ayan Energy Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 188 | Const. P. 7281/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Tariq Chobdar (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 189 | Const. P. 6923/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s SEPCO III Electric (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 190 | Const. P. 6930/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | JS Bank Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 191 | Const. P. 6452/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Sidat Hyder Morshed Associates Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 192 | Const. P. 6641/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s SAMBA Bank Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 193 | Const. P. 6944/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s ISRA University (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 194 | Const. P. 6961/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Allied Engineering & Services (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 195 | Const. P. 7062/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Shah Transport Network (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 196 | Const. P. 4729/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Wazir Ali Ind Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | Yes | Since 2010, Commissioner entrusted with the mandate of calling the record as and when required. Now one thing is for sure that this "as and when required" is not meaningless as being consistently followed and maintained throughout. We now need to understand what could be the event or stage when this phrase may come into play and be given some meaning. Eventually when a Commissioner examines the return of a tax payer, he may have some queries which might be tempting to call record as he may not be able to reconcile and/or resolve them through return statement. Those queries must be understood and settled to the satisfaction of the commissioner before he could make up his mind further. Now the audit is nowhere in the scheme when such questions came for consideration after going through the returns while the Commissioner acts under 25(1) of Sales Tax Act, 1990. Surely the record may satisfy the curious mind but queries must be genuine at the time of calling the record which could not have been answered without going through the record required. Therefore, record calling could not be a roving exercise and cannot be a courtesy call either. The phrase "as and when required" had remained part of Section 25 throughout ever since it was introduced. It is not "as and when desired" but "as and when required". Therefore, the reasons in the shape of "mindful queries" must be in existence and disclosed before calling record for the fulfillment of requirement "as and when required". The requirements of 25(1) are neither unfettered nor are so liberal that a hunting expedition would commence. It is the periodical transfiguration of the provisions of Section 25 that led us believe that there has to be an event or occasion when the Commissioner required the record and documents maintained under this Act or any other Act. Even requiring the documents/record for satisfaction of queries must be revealed so that notice may not transform into a hunting time. However, if the mindful queries were not met, he may authorize an officer of the Inland Revenue, on the basis of record obtained under subsection (1) by him, to conduct audit. Now, if the officer of the Inland Revenue subordinate to the Commissioner is under the obligatory command of Commissioner to conduct audit then the Commissioner must disclose the discrepancies he found while forwarding record already obtained by him, for audit be conducted in pursuance of the queries of the Commissioner, which queries must see the daylight so that the officer of the Inland Revenue proceed accordingly. The officer of the Inland Revenue on his own without having knowledge of discrepancies, queries of the Commissioner, cannot start the proceedings of audit which has to be under the authorization. It would only be general audit but not as contemplated under section 25(1) which compelled the commissioner to call record. The authorization thus should contain the reasons and mindful queries required to be processed through the audit which he has passed on to designated officer. Thus, insofar as Section 25 is concerned, we would conclude that for purposes of Section 25(1) Commissioner must frame legitimate mindful queries to the knowledge of a taxpayer after going through the returns which must be either be satisfied after calling the record or otherwise. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.315-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Wazir Ali Industries Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | |
| 197 | Const. P. 3488/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Greeno Corp Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS The Chief Commissioner IR and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 198 | Const. P. 7334/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Shahmurad Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 199 | Const. P. 6624/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Aligarh Institute of Technology (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 200 | Const. P. 5836/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Khawaja Anver Majid (Petitioner) VS F.B.R & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 201 | Const. P. 4418/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Rehmatullah Khan (Petitioner) VS Cantonment Board Faisal (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 202 | Const. P. 7847/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Swiss Specialty Chemicals (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 203 | Const. P. 6644/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s SAMBA Bank Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 204 | Const. P. 6690/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 205 | Const. P. 7303/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Erum Tahir (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 206 | Const. P. 1917/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Adeel (Petitioner) VS Cantonment Board Faisal & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 207 | Const. P. 6702/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Adam Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 208 | Const. P. 8568/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Falak Jan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 06-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.272/2022 Falak Jan v. The Federation of Pakistan through its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 209 | Const. P. 163/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Raheem Shaikh (Petitioner) VS PTCL and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-FEB-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 210 | 2014 YLR 1273 | Suit 1015/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Abdul Aziz. (Plaintiff) VS Shahid Ahmed and others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 24-JAN-14 | Yes | "Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VII, R. 11, O. II, R. 2 & O. XXIII, R. 1---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Arts.91 & 113---Withdrawal of earlier suit---Filing of fresh suit---Rejection of plaint---Scope---Contention of defendants was that earlier suit was withdrawn unconditionally and plaintiff was precluded from filing fresh suit---Validity---Plaintiff had fresh cause of action to file the present suit---Earlier suit had been withdrawn under O.XXIII, Rule 1, C.P.C. but same would preclude the plaintiff to file fresh suit on the same cause of action---Cause of action to file the present suit commenced from the day when the alleged settlement between the parties was arrived at and compliance of same was denied---Plaintiff sought compliance of settlement arrived at between the parties at the time of withdrawal of earlier suit for which limitation period was three years---Article 91 of Limitation Act, 1908 would not apply in the present case as the facts entitling the plaintiff to file present suit commenced when public notice was issued---Present suit had been filed for enforcement of settlement arrived at in the earlier suit between the parties---Earlier suit was filed for declaration and cancellation of sale deed, however on account of settlement a fresh cause accrued to the plaintiff on denial of such settlement---Plaintiff had not relinquished any rights with regard to suit property---Application filed under O. VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. was dismissed accordingly. " | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 211 | Civil Revision 107/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2014 | Ahmed Saeed Qureshi (Applicant) VS Abdul Aziz and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 09-NOV-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 212 | Civil Revision 212/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2009 | Darhoon (Applicant) VS Abdi Since dead Thr: His Legal Heirs & an Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 17-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 213 | Const. P. 202/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Imran and Others (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-JAN-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 214 | Const. P. 647/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Abdul Sattar S/o Irshad Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Hussain and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 31-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 215 | Suit 1046/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Dr. Ali Hasan (Plaintiff) VS Defence Officers Housing Authority (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 08-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 216 | Const. P. 1019/2011 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | Ahsan Ali Arain & Others (Petitioner) VS Province Of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 217 | Adm. Suit 5/2006 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2006 | M/s. Fauji Ferttilizer Co. Ltd (Plaintiff) VS M.V. B-India & Ors (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 08-DEC-16 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 218 | 2015 CLC 1278 | Execution 64/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Decree Holder) VS SULTAN ALI AKHANI (Judgment Debtor) | S.B. | Judgement | 05-MAR-15 | Yes | "Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) --- ----S. 47 & O. XXI, R. 23-A---Arbitration Act (X of 1940), S. 14---Application for making award as rule of court---Consent decree---Execution petition---Objections---Contention of decree holders was that objections to execution petition could not be considered unless judgment debtor had deposited the decretal amount or furnished security in lieu thereof---Validity---Validity of decree could only be challenged before the Executing Court if the same was void or had been passed by the court having no jurisdiction---Provisions of O.XXI, R.23-A, C.P.C. were mandatory and objections to the execution by a judgment debtor could not be considered unless judgment debtor had deposited the decretal amount or furnished security in lieu thereof---Executing Court could not go beyond the decree---Judgment debtor could not escape from his obligation under the decree---Requirement of notice and hearing were duly complied with at the time of trial---Executing Court could not be burdened with re-trial---Compromise decree was in fact a contract, breach of which might give rise to fresh cause of action to decree holder---Decree was neither void nor it had been passed by a Court having no jurisdiction---Objections to execution application taken by the judgment debtor were over-ruled, in circumstances." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 219 | Const. P. 1114/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Ferozuddin (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 14-FEB-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 220 | Suit 1431/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | AHMED JAFFER & CO (Plaintiff) VS NEW HOLLAND KOBELO CONST. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 13-APR-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 221 | Const. P. 6354/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Gilani Hygenic Products Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 222 | Suit 2372/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | SYED MUHAMMAD AYUB (Plaintiff) VS PROVINCE OF SINDH & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 11-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 223 | Const. P. 188/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Falcon - I (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 224 | Const. P. 4296/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | S.S Fashion Resources (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 225 | Const. P. 4559/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Asim Shaikh (Petitioner) VS Malik Muhammad Afzal and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 226 | Adm. Suit 3/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | M/S Cockett Marine Oil DMCC (Plaintiff) VS M.V ATLANTIC ENTERPRISE & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 11-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 227 | Const. P. 4880/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Ammiza Transport (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 228 | 2023 SBLR 22 | Suit 630/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Mohammad Tarique Khan (Plaintiff) VS Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 11-MAR-22 | Yes | 1- A promotion cannot be deferred till such time the enquiry and/or disciplinary proceedings are finalized as a person is presumed to be innocent until found guilty1 . Pendency of inquiry and minor penalties could not come in way of promotion; enquiry proceedings pending against plaintiff for an indefinite period smacked of arbitrariness and mala fide and is a hanging sword on head of employees; such treatment could not sustain in eye of law to deprive the plaintiff of promotion2 . Pendency of inquiry was no ground for denying promotion to the employee and no one could be punished by denying promotion before establishing charge3 . Any such rule formed in deviation of settled principle of law would not come in the way of equality rights guaranteed by Constitution. 2--As regards rejection of plaint under order VII rule 11 CPC on the ground of res judicata is concerned, the defendants plead that the subject matter of instant suit has been decided in the earlier suit and/or the subject matter of earlier suit. In this regard firstly the subject matter of instant suit is a subsequent show-cause notice which was not even in existence at the time of filing earlier suit. Therefore neither principle of order 2 rule 2 nor doctrine of order 23 rule 1 CPC would apply. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 229 | Civil Revision 76/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2014 | Mst Nagina (Applicant) VS Govt of Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 230 | Const. P. 1029/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Mst. Aroosha (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 231 | II.A. 54/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | The Secretary thr:secretary PCCC Karachi (Appellant) VS Abdul Samad Shaikh & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 24-JAN-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 232 | F.R.A 24/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Nasir Hussain & Ors (Appellant) VS Mumtaz Ali (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 20-OCT-17 | Yes | The evidence i.e. available on record and three contrary versions and the pleadings of the rent case wherein no amount of rent was stated to be in existence or fixed and the cause of action alone was enough to establish that the cause was not on account of non-payment of any rent and it is only on account of interference caused by the appellant in renting out shops to different individuals that respondents furious to file the ejectment application. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 233 | F.R.A 34/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Fazal Jamil S/o Jamil Ahmed (Appellant) VS Akhlaq Ahmed and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 05-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 234 | Const. P. 549/2007 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2007 | Muhammad Sabir (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Hayat & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 01-NOV-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 235 | Const. P. 8224/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Hassan (Petitioner) VS Abdullah Gaddi and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 236 | Const. P. 1491/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2013 | Noshad Ali and others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 237 | Const. P. 757/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Iqbal Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 238 | Const. P. 6924/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Al Haj Pakistan Kirthar B.V (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.187-K/2022 The Commissioner Inland Revenue, (Legal) v. Al Haj Pakistan Kirthar B.V. & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 239 | Suit 2085/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Dr. Mukesh Kumar & others. (Plaintiff) VS Sindh Employees (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 17-JAN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 240 | Const. P. 706/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Mst. Anum (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 241 | Suit 1540/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Syed Faiz Bukhari (Plaintiff) VS Siraj Muhammad Iqbal & others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 16-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 242 | Suit 863/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Iqbal Khan (Plaintiff) VS Pakistan International Airlines Comp Ltd & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 11-MAR-22 | No | A show-cause notice was originally contested by filing a suit however no substantial relief was availed by the plaintiff and consequently he received a dismissal order from service on 12.11.2019. It is the case of the plaintiff that he has already filed an appeal against such dismissal which is a remedy under the PIACL Employees (Service & Discipline) Regulations 1985, copy of which is available at page 191 of the file. Learned counsel for plaintiff submits that there is no rational and reason provided in the dismissal order as to why he (plaintiff) would submit forged and fabricated degree of B.Sc. when it was never required at the time of his appointment. Such point requires consideration but since the plaintiff has surrendered himself to the jurisdiction of appellate authority of the department available to him at the relevant time under the Regulations, it would be appellate authority which is supposed to give its finding specially on this defence taken by the plaintiff that there was no necessity or requirement under the advertisement to submit bachelor degree i.e. BSc at the relevant time though he concedes that he presented a mark sheet of second year BSc wherein he failed. Learned counsel for defendant No.1 during course of his arguments has also conceded that the remedy for the plaintiff is by way of appeal in terms of the Regulations prevailing at the relevant time. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 243 | Suit 1434/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | SUPER STAR METAL FINISHING (PRIVATE) LIMITED (Plaintiff) VS SYED SHAHZAD ALI & ANOTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 03-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 244 | 2022 PLD Sindh 378 | Adm. Suit 2/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Tenedos Denizcilik ve Tie Ltd. (Plaintiff) VS M.T MAKHAMBET & Others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 04-MAR-22 | Yes | --Section 11 CPC is universal doctrine so it does not matter if the judgment is of a foreign Court or of a Court beyond the territorial limits of this Court. The subject claim is a tried and adjudicated issue (within competent jurisdiction) and hence it is being applied for enforcing res- judicata. There is no legislation enacted contrary to the acceptance of such rule except as provided in Section 11 CPC. --The explanation provides that a former suit is one which has been decided prior, irrespective of its filing date. Explanation II provides that for the purpose of Section 11 competence of Court shall be determined irrespective of any provision as to right of appeal from the decision of such Court5 . Explanation III provides that matter referred to must in the former suit have been alleged by one party and either denied or admitted expressly or impliedly by the other. Explanation IV provides that any matter which might or ought to have been made ground of defence or attack in such former suit shall be deemed to have been a matter directly or substantially in issue in such suit and under Explanation V any relief claimed in the plaint, which is not expressly granted by the decree, shall for the purposes of this section be deemed to have been refused. The remaining explanation VI is not relevant for the purposes of issue in hand. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 245 | 2020 SBLR Sindh 744 | Const. P. 213/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Burhan (Petitioner) VS Election Commisson Of Pakistan & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam | |||
| 246 | Judicial Companies Misc. 41/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Gadoon Textile Mills Ltd. and Others (Applicant) VS .. (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 04-JUN-14 | Yes | "Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984)--- ----Ss. 284, 285, 286, 287 & 288---Demerger of companies---Collective business decision---Scope---Determination of consideration including the commercial aspect of the merger along with manner of the swap ratio was primarily and substantially the prerogative of the members of the respective companies---Businessmen had to take decision considering all the pros and cons of demerger and merger of companies---While taking such decision there would be chances of success and failure but while questioning such decision the bona fides was the real test---Businessmen could take decision foreseeing the future aspect---Court could only see that all the legal formalities had been fulfilled and scheme was neither unjust nor unfair or against the national interest but could not challenge the wisdom of a decision of businessmen---While demerging shares of Real Estate and Textile the representatives or shareholders might decide to keep them separately which could not be challenged before the court---Company was conducting two business which were being separated---Advantages and disadvantages of keeping them together would remain there by disassociating the two businesses and their shareholding---Both would separately yield profit and loss hence the cumulative effect of the net result would not matter---Proposed scheme was based on the principle that each shareholder would get its respective share in terms of percentage that he was in collective business---Petition for demerger of companies was granted." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 247 | Suit 540/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Khadim Hussain & another. (Plaintiff) VS Huzoor Bux Gabol & others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 24-JAN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 248 | Suit 171/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | SYED MUSTAFA NAWAB ZAIDI (Plaintiff) VS MS KHADIJA ZAIDI & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 17-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 249 | Const. P. 2243/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Reckitt Benckiser (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.6189/2021 Reckitt Benckiser Pakistan Limited, Karachi v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Secretary M/o Law Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad and others,C.A.323/2022 Reckitt Benckiser Pakistan Limited, Karachi v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Secretary M/o Law Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted,Pending | ||
| 250 | Const. P. 1420/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Riaz Ahmed Channo and Ors (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 251 | Const. P. 1678/2011 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | Rehan Warris and others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 252 | Suit 1066/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | MST. LUBNA NAYYER (Plaintiff) VS M/S. EMAAR GIGA KARACHI LTD & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 03-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 253 | Const. P. 501/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Fayyaz Ali Shahani and others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 254 | Const. P. 594/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: C.Ps No.D-634, 677, 700, 750, 794, 841, 896, 899, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905, 907, 910, 914, 916, 917, 919, 922, 924, 925, 927, 928, 929, 931, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 940, 942, 943, 948, 949, 951, 952, 953, 954, 955, 956, 957, 958, 960, 961, 962, 963, 980, 995, 996, 999, 1000, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1014, 1016, 1017, 1018, 1020, 1021, 1027, 1028, 1033, 1038, 1039, 1049, 1051, 1055, 1057, 1058, & 1062 of 2022 | 2022 | Mukhtiar Ahmed and other (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 255 | Const. P. 1584/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Khushi Muhammad (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-APR-22 | No | Since the Tribunals for the purposes, as disclosed in the petition, are functioning within the respective jurisdiction, the petitioner may approach the concerned Tribunal, having jurisdiction to exhaust the remedy as available to him under the law, as these intricate questions cannot be decided under Article 199 of the Constitution | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | |||
| 256 | Const. P. 1270/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Muhammad Yamin (Petitioner) VS C.B.C & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author) | ||||
| 257 | Spl.Cr.Bail 81/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | ATHAR HAYYAT & ANOTHER (Applicant) VS THE STATE (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 30-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 258 | M.A. 20/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Muhammad Ehsan (Appellant) VS Muhammad Zakir & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 259 | Const. P. 7279/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Arbab Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 22-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 260 | Judicial Companies Misc. 12/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Patek (Private) Limited and another (Applicant) VS . (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-MAY-16 | Yes | It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the scheme of arrangement is such that the petitioner No.1 is being demerged and one part of it is being amalgamated and merged with petitioner No.2. Scheme is available as annexure-E. In terms of the order dated 23.9.2015 such petitioners were allowed to hold separate meetings with their shareholders including the directors and the Chairman was directed to submit report accordingly. The report has been filed subsequently and in pursuance of this merger petition SECP has filed its parawsie comments/objections which are substantially dealt with one by one. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | |||
| 261 | Const. P. 1827/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Muhammad Rashid (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-APR-22 | No | Co-owners/sharers cannot be excluded from a declaration in respect of property in question on the basis of unregistered surrendered deed, unless they appear before the Court and give a statement on Oath in this regard. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | |||
| 262 | Const. P. 458/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Muhammad Hasnain (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 263 | Const. P. 3004/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Lucknow Coop. Housing Society (Petitioner) VS XIIth A.D.J South Karachi and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 264 | Execution 3/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | ABDUL HALEEM (Decree Holder) VS M/S. GULSHAN-e-FAISAL CO-OP SOCIETY & AN OTHER (Judgment Debtor) | S.B. | Order | 21-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 265 | Const. P. 7507/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Mehtab Ali (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 266 | Const. P. 3312/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Shahid Brothers (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 267 | Const. P. 115/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Ali Akbar (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 268 | Const. P. 1308/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Mst. Ayesha and others (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Saeed and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 05-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 269 | Suit 283/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | M/s. Al-Awwal International. (Plaintiff) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 09-MAY-16 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 270 | Suit.B 116/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | BANKERS EQUITY LTD (Plaintiff) VS SARDAR ABDUL HAMID & ORS (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 16-DEC-14 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 271 | Const. P. 4563/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Shell Pakistan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 272 | Const. P. 451/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Haji Abdul Raziq Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 273 | Const. P. 2058/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Fintex Manufacturer Corp (Pvt) Ltd and Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 274 | Const. P. 1905/2010 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Province Of Sindh & Others (Petitioner) VS Baxial & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 275 | Const. P. 744/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2018 | Mohammad Mahar (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 276 | Suit 1433/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | SUPER TECH AUTO PARTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED (Plaintiff) VS SYED SHAHZAD ALI & ANOTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 03-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 277 | Const. P. 5537/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Hadi International (Pvt) Ltd and Others (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 278 | Const. P. 334/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Muhammad Sajid (Petitioner) VS Mst. Lubna & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 23-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 279 | Const. P. 640/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Abdul Hafeez & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 280 | Suit 2273/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Mst. Shehnaz Sultana (Plaintiff) VS Kamal Ahmed Qureshi & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 05-NOV-22 | Yes | Indeed in our society women have been deprived of their due share in the property but the preponderance of evidence yield it other way as not only has she admitted to have received Rs.4 lacs as her share in the property but also admitted to have been maintained throughout her life by her brother/defendant No.1. No other sibling came to support her claim. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 281 | Suit 182/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | PAKISTAN STATE OIL CO. LTD. (Plaintiff) VS ABDUL ALI & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 08-NOV-22 | Yes | that the defendants are not precluded from using their land in pursuance of Rule 10 of ibid Rules 1951 however the reasonable restriction for the security and safety of the occupants be adhered to, which restriction shall not be arbitrary and fanciful and that such restriction would not be of such magnitude as would materially render and disentitle neighboring land owners from utilizing their land in accordance with law as it would then be in violation of Article, 4, 23 and 24 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Plaintiff has prayed in the suit that no structure/ construction shall be permitted and that defendants are not entitled to raise any construction within a distance of 200 sq. yards from the plaintiff key point installation i.e. category 1-A, Zulfiqarabad Oil Terminal, is thus misconceived and would amount to acquiring the property without its market value under acquisition laws. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 282 | Suit 1797/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | THE HUB POWER COMPANY LTD & OTHERS (Plaintiff) VS CHINA POWER HUB GENERATION COMPANY (PVT) LTD & ORS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 30-NOV-22 | Yes | I- Despite different designations there are in fact `legal similarities` attached to both the documents i.e. standard letter of credit and standby letter of credit, if compared. There may be some differences in the banking practice but are functionally similar and makes no material difference when it comes to execution and implementation. The SBLC thus has evolved as one of the kind of letter of credit and forms on independent guarantee such as performance bond/surety ship guarantee. II- While in every instance where there is a fraud there would have been a lack of bonafides as well, however, to its contrast it does not mean that in every instance where beneficiary of credit lacks bonafides there is necessarily a fraud behind it. One may be compelled to or had no choice, despite having knowledge. III- The concept of unconscionability runs the same way i.e. the concept of unconscionability involves unfairness as distinct from dishonesty or fraud or conduct of a kind so reprehensible or lacking in good faith that the court of conscience either restrain the party or refuse to assist the party. Mere breaches of contract by a party would not by themselves be unconscionable. Thus unfairness is also excluded for the concept of unconscionability to prevail. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 283 | Const. P. 800/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Kamaluddin Jamro ( Khi To Hyd ) (Petitioner) VS V.C University Of Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 284 | R.A (Civil Revision) 103/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Syed Hashmat & others (Applicant) VS Syed Azmat & other (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 285 | Const. P. 287/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2018 | Rafique Ahmed & Others (Petitioner) VS Abdul Razzaque & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-NOV-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 286 | Const. P. 616/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Muhammad Salman Khan & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 287 | Const. P. 545/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Ghulam Sarwae Qureshi (Petitioner) VS FED Of Pakistan & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 288 | Suit 1294/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | M/S KARACHI CABLE SERVICES (PVT) LTD. & OTHERS (Plaintiff) VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 09-SEP-22 | Yes | Even if there was a jurisdictional error with regard to action initiated by PEMRA authority it had to be objected and/or resisted before the concerned authority whereas to my grasp, it is not a jurisdictional error | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 289 | Const. P. 43/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2013 | Saeed Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Govt Of Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 290 | Const. P. 651/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Nafees Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 291 | Const. P. 607/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: Delimitation Connected Matters | 2022 | Muhammad Umar & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 292 | Const. P. 621/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Abdul Jabbar & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 293 | Const. P. 722/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Samina Khokhar & another (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 294 | Const. P. 723/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Zahid Ali & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 295 | Const. P. 809/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Taj Muhammad and anothers (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 296 | Suit 1027/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | Syed Qadir Dad Shah (Plaintiff) VS Pakistan International Airline Company (PIACL) (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 15-DEC-22 | Yes | Undoubtedly the aircrew needs to be looked after by specially trained staff and for this reason such job training is inevitable. The normal take care of an employee (patient) of defendant No.1 are different from those who operate flights and there could be no two opinions about it. The officials of defendant No.1 may have awaken late in realizing their duties and it is they who could be blamed for earlier flight operations through untrained staff but the passengers cannot be left at the mercy of those who lacks such qualification/training, be it an "on job training" | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 297 | Const. P. 1569/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Muhammad Siddique (Petitioner) VS SILK Bank Ltd & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-JUN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | C.P.842-K/2022 Muhammad Siddique v. Silk Bank Limited through its Principal Officer/Manager Road Branch Hyderabad & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 298 | Suit 941/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | DRUGPHARMA CHEMICALS (PVT) LIMITED (Plaintiff) VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 16-NOV-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 299 | Const. P. 710/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Fida Hussain & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 300 | Const. P. 645/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Muhassan Ali & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 301 | Suit -380/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Mst. Nasreen (Plaintiff) VS Ali Hasan Brohi & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 26-JAN-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 302 | Const. P. 650/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Saniya Adnan (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 303 | Const. P. 1953/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Shoaib Muhammad (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-JUN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 304 | Suit 2814/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | REHAN HAMID (Plaintiff) VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 26-OCT-22 | Yes | Plaint Returned under Order VII Rule 10 CPC. ---The only defence taken by the learned counsel for the plaintiff is that when he landed at Karachi Airport he came to know about impugned notification dated 26.11.2021, therefore, the cause accrued within the territorial limit of this Court. I am afraid this kind of logic is not tenable in law. The cause of action was accrued when and from where the impugned notification was issued and also at place where in ???pursuance of such agreement??? he works or worked for gain, and not where he on his arrival or departure informed or where it was brought to his knowledge. Furthermore, the plaintiff was appointed with defendant at Hyderabad and throughout he was employed there, therefore, if this plea is taken to be lawful it will make entire scheme of jurisdiction as redundant and such was not the intention of legislation. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 305 | Const. P. 1924/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Qazi Ahmed Kamal (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-JUN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 306 | Const. P. 1607/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Lal Jee (Petitioner) VS Election Commission of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAY-22 | No | Delimitation Matter | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | |||
| 307 | R.A (Civil Revision) 200/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Muhammad Ali & Others (Applicant) VS Haji Rahim Bux & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-AUG-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 308 | H.C.A 410/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | K-Electric Ltd. (Appellant) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-MAR-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | ||||
| 309 | Judicial Companies Misc. 12/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | RAZAQUE STEELS (PVT) LTD AND ANOTHER (Applicant) VS NA (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 02-MAR-23 | Yes | Merger as Scheme of Arrangement Allowed | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 310 | Const. P. 1027/2023 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2023 | Mst. Mehmooda Khanam (Petitioner) VS CEO Cantonment Board Clifton and Another (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-MAR-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 311 | Const. P. 1227/2023 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2023 | Syed Renata (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-MAR-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | ||||
| 312 | Const. P. 90/2006 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2006 | Malik Maqsoodul Hassan (Appellant) VS Muhammad Faisal Azam & 5 Ors (Appellant) | S.B. | Judgement | 15-MAY-18 | Yes | The point of merger insofar as invoking the jurisdiction in terms of Section 12(2) CPC is concerned has already attained the finality in terms of judgment reported in PLD 2015 SC 358 and there are no issues on its maintainability. However the case as presented does not come within the frame of Section 12(2) CPC. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 313 | Suit 721/2003 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2003 | Arif Ali Shah (Plaintiff) VS Povice of Sindh & ors (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 15-JUN-12 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 314 | Suit 804/1996 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 1996 | ABDUL KARIM K. KHAN. (Plaintiff) VS ABDUL MALIK K. LOKHA (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 04-NOV-13 | Yes | The plaintiff cannot succeed for the restoration of his suit on the weaknesses of defendant Counsel. He had to show why he was prevented from appearing which was to be measured on the touch stone of the ???sufficient cause??? independently and not viz-a-viz defendant???s Counsel appearance or non-appearance. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 315 | Const. P. 442/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Mangan Dahani (Petitioner) VS S.H.O PS Madeji and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 316 | Const. P. 630/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mst Yasmin Abbasi (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Darri and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 317 | Civil Revision 43/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Dilbar Hussain Solangi (Applicant) VS Ali Sher and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 318 | Const. P. 1997/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2010 | Ghulam Farooq Mirani (Petitioner) VS Managing Director P.I.A and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah | ||||
| 319 | Const. P. 111/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Dr Athar Hussain Shah and others (Petitioner) VS SSP Larkana and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 320 | Cr.Misc. 209/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Khadim Ali Gopang (Applicant) VS Additional District Judge Kamber & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 321 | Cr.Bail 521/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Muhammad Sallah Junejo (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 08-FEB-13 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 322 | Const. P. 901/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Qazi Abdul Wahab Junejo (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Dokri and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 11-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 323 | Civil Tran 2/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Liaquat Ali Khoso (Petitioner) VS Anwar Khso & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 324 | 2014 PLD Sindh 268 | Suit 1706/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Dr. Samrina Hashmi (Plaintiff) VS Pakistan Medial Association (Centre) & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 02-DEC-13 | Yes | Certainly and undoubtly the cause of association is much higher than the cause of an individual. In this matter, it is to be seen whether injuries or irreparable loss that may be caused to the association is important than the personal injuries of the plaintiff. I have no confusion in my mind that the cause of the association is at higher pedestal. In priority the interest and reputation of the association has to be safe guarded. At the same time this does not mean that the cause of an individual is to be ignored. What is meant by this observation, is that in priority cause of the association is to be kept at higher forum. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 325 | Const. P. 2013/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Mst Rukhsana Shah (Petitioner) VS Ghulam Rasool Shah and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 326 | Const. P. 8/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Irshad Khatoon (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Badeh District Larkana and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 327 | Const. P. 482/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Shahmore Shaikh (Petitioner) VS SHO PS New Foujdari and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.130-K/2012 Arbab Zulfiqar and another v. Speaker Provincial Assembly through its Secretary Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed | ||
| 328 | Const. P. 2338/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Mumtaz Ali Joyo (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Nasirabad and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 329 | Const. P. 6/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Naseem Khatoon and another (Petitioner) VS SSP Larkana and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 04-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 330 | Cr.Bail 241/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Manthar Channa (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 331 | Civil Tran 6/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Khan Mohammad Borhi (Applicant) VS Mohamad Hashim Brohi and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 14-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 332 | Const. P. 709/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Bakhshal Khakhrani (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Rehmatpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 333 | Const. P. 11/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Shazia Mangi (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Dari and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 04-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 334 | Const. P. 603/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Ali Asghar Panhwar (Petitioner) VS Addl; District Judge Mehar and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 335 | Const. P. 156/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Bashir Ahmed Noonari and others (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Dera Sarki and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 336 | Const. P. 190/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Manzoor Hussain Kalhoro (Petitioner) VS V/S SHO PS Market Larkana and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 337 | Const. P. 2113/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Amjad Hussain Shaikh (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Shahdadkot and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 338 | Const. P. 109/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Hakeema and others (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Sobhodero and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 339 | Const. P. 2729/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Noor Illahi Khan Sundrani (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 340 | Civil Revision 11/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Manthar Jarwar (Applicant) VS Khuda Bux Phull and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 341 | Cr.Bail 508/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Rasheed Ahmed Arain (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-JAN-13 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 342 | Cr.Bail 33/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mohammad Achar Bozdar & Ors (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 343 | Cr.Misc. 227/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mst Inayat Khatoon Korkani (Applicant) VS The state and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 01-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 344 | Cr.Bail 714/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Muhammad Ramzan (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 17-OCT-12 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 345 | Cr.Bail 720/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Muhammad Mouchar and others (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 12-OCT-12 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 346 | Cr.Misc. 327/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Muhammad Younus (Applicant) VS Muhammad Zafar Ali Khan and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 30-SEP-13 | Yes | The trial Court appears to have passed the order summarily without touching the legal aspect as enshrined in aforesaid two cited cases and as described u/s 179 Cr.P.C. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 347 | 2012 CLD 1623 | Suit.B 65/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | NIB BANK LTD (Plaintiff) VS TERRY TOWELLERS (PVT) lTED (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-AUG-12 | Yes | Suit for recovery was decreed and machinery of judgment-debtor was to be auctioned---Objection Application to enforcement of decree---Contention of the objector inter alia was that he was the landlord of the premises where the machinery was kept; that arrears of rent had been due to him and that he on his own expense moved the machinery to a godown and had incurred rent for the same---Contention of the objector was that he be compensated for the costs incurred by him from the sale proceeds of the machinery---Validity---Claims of the objector were flimsy and he had not kept record of the accounts or payments by cash for the godown and it was inconceivable that he was incurring expenditures on a person who in arrears of rent and with whom he was litigating---Machinery was hypothecated/pledged with the decree holder Bank and even otherwise it was the preferential right of the decree holder Bank to auction the machinery against their claim---Claim of objector was without merit---Application was dismissed, in circumstances. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 348 | Cr.Bail 403/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Mubarak Ali (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 02-JUL-13 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 349 | Suit 211/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | AerSale 27469 Aviation Ltd., & another (Plaintiff) VS Air Indus (Pvt) Ltd. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 26-APR-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 350 | 2016 PLC (CS) 1219 | Suit 739/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Muhammad Safdar Anjum & Others (Plaintiff) VS P.I.A. Corporation (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 11-APR-16 | Yes | "Pakistan International Airlines Corporation Employees (Service and Discipline) Regulations, 1985--- ----Reglns. 78 & 79---Employees of Pakistan International Airlines Corporation---Audio tapes instigating the employees to observe strike---Dispensing with regular inquiry---Non-providing of material to be used against the employees---Effect---Audio tapes---Prerequisites for admissibility and evidentiary value---Personal hearing of such employee---Requirements---Corporation ordered for dispensing with regular inquiry against the employees but no material/information was communicated to them on the basis of which inquiry was dispensed with---Validity---No material on the basis of which inquiry was dispensed with was communicated to the employees---Show-cause notice was silent as to the nature of material and information claimed to be in the custody and possession of authority---Impugned order to dispense with regular inquiry was devoid of judicious application of mind---Anyone in the authority who had decided to dispense with holding of an inquiry had rendered himself/herself an unfit person to conduct further proceedings of personal hearing---Dispensation order could only be passed once the material was shown and shared with the accused employee whose reply and response should become a basis of such decision---Authority or person giving personal hearing should not rely on personal knowledge and information as in that case the essence of impartiality would be lost---Person who recorded alleged audio tape conversation should be material witness and without he being confronted with the accusation such conversation should not be used as an evidence against him---Competent authority could dispense with inquiry if facts and circumstances of the case so warranted---Such Authority should not sit with prejudice mind that they had already dispensed with the inquiry and had made their mind---Substantial right of inquiry could not be snatched from the employees without hearing them---Impugned show cause notice of hearing was bad in law as it was without reasoning and same did not contain the material to be used against the employees---Competent authority was bound to record reasons in writing for dispensing with holding of inquiry---Audio tape recording could be admitted in evidence if it was produced in evidence by its maker---Prerequisites for admissibility of tape recording as evidence were that accuracy of recording had to be proved; voice recorded to be properly identified and court must consider the genuineness of the tape before it was accepted---No one should decide cases on the basis of personal knowledge as in that case he would become party to the proceedings---Competent authority should sit with judicious mind and impartially listen to the defence and response of the employees---Corporation was directed to provide all the material available which it felt sufficient to dispense with holding of inquiry---Employees should be provided reasonable opportunity which might not in any case exceed one week for filing of reply which should be considered at the time of hearing for passing appropriate orders---Employees would be entitled for all the benefits as they were receiving earlier till they continued to be employees of the Corporation." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 351 | 2017 CLD 1148 | Execution 23/2008 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2008 | Bankers Equity Limited & others (Decree Holder) VS M/s Pangrio Sugar Mills Ltd. (Judgment Debtor) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-17 | Yes | The Banking Court while executing a decree passed under Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 is entitled to adopt any procedure deemed appropriate by it to effect sale of mortgaged properties in execution of a decree. Judicial sanctity in disposing of the mortgaged property through Court auction is required to be reaffirmed. Such sanctity could only be disturbed if there is a material irregularity which leads to fraud to cause loss to any one which is not the attribution. Mere allegation that the property worth more than it was evaluated is not sufficient. Every judgment debtor, if allowed to plead the value of his property there can hardly be any auction which could be conducted. There was nothing to prevent the judgment debtor during these ten years since decree was passed in 2006 to bring a buyer of its choice who could offer a price as it (judgment debtor) desires. The Court while considering the objections of the judgment debtor has also to weigh and consider the miseries and pain undertaken by the decree holder. It is within the domain and propagative of the banking Court to adopt any of the procedure it deems fit and proper and hence this question is not of any material importance that the bid is substantially low as compared to the reserved price or forced sale price. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 352 | Suit.B 16/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Askari Bank Limited (Plaintiff) VS Sajid Textile Industries (Pvt.) Limited (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 03-MAR-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 353 | Const. P. 3841/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2014 | Ranjho (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 01-MAR-19 | Yes | The petitioner has every right to pursue his remedy against it, which he failed. The amount paid to the father could never be considered as the dower amount paid to the bride and that she was liable to return at the time of dissolution of marriage by way of khulla. Even the ring as mentioned in the nikahnama was refused / declined to have been received by her and no confidence inspiring evidence was recorded by the defendant to believe that version. In this constitution petition such deeper re-appraisal of evidence is not within the domain of this Court when two efficacious remedies i.e. trial Court and appellate Court were exhausted. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 354 | Const. P. 1715/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Mst. Sadaf Younus thr Her Father Muhammad Younus (Petitioner) VS Saqib Nadeem & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 18-DEC-17 | Yes | Insofar as Rules 5 and 6 of the West Pakistan Rules under Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 is concerned, the petitioner was divorced in Pakistan while the custody of the ward was with her. Both the counsels have not objected that the ward is a dual national and since ward being with mother is living within the territorial limits of the Court where Guardian & Ward application was filed and the cause of action in terms of Rule 6 ibid arisen, it has the jurisdiction. Such point was never raised before the trial Court or before the appellate Court and hence it does not lie in the mouth of the respondent who himself filed an application for the custody of the ward surrendering himself to the jurisdiction of the trial Court. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.641-K/2018 Mst: Sadaf Younus v. Saqib Nadeem and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | |
| 355 | Const. P. 154/2010 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2010 | Sanaullah Rajar (Petitioner) VS Govt.of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-JAN-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro(Author) | ||||
| 356 | 2018 CLD 1305 | M.A. 317/2003 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2003 | Shezan Services (Pvt) Limited (Appellant) VS Shezan Bakers & Confectioners (Pvt) Ltd (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 14-MAY-18 | Yes | The interpretation of subsection 2 of Section 10 of Trademark Act, 1940, in view of the above, cannot be restricted to a simple concurrent use irrespective of any agreement. Use of trademark under the agreement is not only permissive use but conclusive rights were being delegated and hence the use is concurrent to the use of the inventor. The subject use thus would come within honest concurrent use under the circumstances described in the agreement. It is inconceivable that the appellant would enjoy the consideration of a rental premises if the right of trademark is excluded. Certainly the consideration was for a particular territory i.e. Lahore division which was taken care of by the Registrar | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.57-K/2018 Shezan Services (Pvt) Ltd v. Shezan Bakers & Confectioners (Pvt) Ltd and another,C.P.838-K/2018 Shezan Services (Pvt) Ltd v. Shezan Bakers & Confectioners (Pvt) Ltd and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Allowed,Pending Leave Granted |
| 357 | Const. P. 1038/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2014 | P.O Sindh Thrgh: Divi: Forest Affors: Divi: Khp. (Petitioner) VS Photo Rajar & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 358 | Const. P. 1497/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Ghulam Shabbir Pathan (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 359 | Civil Revision 175/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Mst. Nawab Khatoon (Applicant) VS Jagan Bhayo and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-JAN-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 360 | Const. P. 2889/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2016 | Syed Mukhtiar Ali Shah (Petitioner) VS Province Of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 22-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 361 | Const. P. 3128/2011 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | Lt. Col (R) Asif Saeed and another (Petitioner) VS The State (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 06-NOV-12 | Yes | Section 6(2)(d) the action was designed in such a way that it is likely to cause death or endanger a person???s life. Section 6(2)(ee), define use of explosive substance. Section 6(2)(i) pertains as to an action leading to a serious risk to safety of the public or a section of in the way it has been designed to frighten the general public. Section 6(2)(j) and (n) is also attracted/involved as the action pertains to burning of vehicles and violence against police force and public servants etc. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.1102/2016 Lt. Col (R) Asif Saeed & another v. The State & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn | |
| 362 | Const. P. 727/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Muhammad Furqan Memon (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 363 | Const. P. 5189/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Abdul Manan (Petitioner) VS Municipal Commissioner Sukkur & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-JAN-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | C.P.265/2019 Abdul Manan v. Municipal Commissioner, Sukkur & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 364 | Const. P. 742/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Muhammad Kashif (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 365 | Const. P. 1413/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Nooruddin Siddiqui (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 366 | Const. P. 4569/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2015 | Aijaz Hussain (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 367 | Const. P. 3297/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Abdul Qadir Korai (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 368 | Const. P. 719/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Pir Bux Khaskheli (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 369 | Civil Revision 108/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Taki Muhammad (decd), thr:L.Rs: (Applicant) VS Mst. Saeed Akhtar & ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 08-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 370 | Const. P. 4697/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Mujeeb -ur- Rehman Mallah & Another (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 371 | Const. P. 3674/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Ali Bux Shar (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 372 | Const. P. 2206/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Mai Sarwar (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 373 | Const. P. 3824/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Aamir Ali (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 374 | Const. P. 2041/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Abid Ali Larik (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 375 | Const. P. 2273/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Ghulam Hyder Soomro (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 376 | Const. P. 4957/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Abdul Majeed Kosh (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 377 | Const. P. 3569/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2013 | Walidad & Ors (Petitioner) VS Govt of Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 378 | Const. P. 4561/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Agha Ahsan Khan (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 379 | I. A 38/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Abdul Jabbar (Appellant) VS National Bank of Pakistan (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-AUG-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 380 | Const. P. 4488/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Rajubdin Mastoi (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 381 | Const. P. 4735/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Abdullah Khoso (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 382 | Const. P. 2413/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Sarfraz Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Government of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 383 | Const. P. 2709/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Amjad Ali (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 384 | Const. P. 2156/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Rafique Ali Ansari (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 385 | Const. P. 2001/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2013 | Rehmatullah Siddiqui (Petitioner) VS Managing Director Concrate Sleeper Factory and ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 386 | Const. P. 65/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Ghulam Shabir (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-18 | Yes | The comments filed by respondents No.3 and 4 accompanied with the recommendation of the Government of Sindh, Finance Department with reference to Rule 171 of the Sindh Civil Services Rules that there shall be no change in the date of birth which shall lead to the advantage to the Government servant concerned and unless an application in that behalf is made by the Government servant concerned within two (02) years of the date on which his service book was opened under Rule 167 of the Sindh Civil Services Rules. His service book apparently was opened in the year 1988 by Superintendent District Jail, Dadu, and an attempt has been made to alter it in the year 2017 and that too on the basis of irrelevant factor on account of medical certificate which otherwise, never permit such correction. It may well be added that things, if are done, in deviation to specific law and procedure, shall always be considered as nullity hence no benefit could be claimed in consequence thereof. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | |||
| 387 | Const. P. 245/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Javed Ahmed Shaikh (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 388 | Const. P. 829/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Rasheed Ahmed @ Abdul Rasheed & Ors (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-OCT-18 | Yes | In pursuance of the report submitted by Mukhtiarkar (Revenue) Ghotki, one Muhammad Umar was found to have occupied the subject piece of 00-09 ghuntas to which these petitioners do not claim. They only claim that this piece of land, which is claimed by respondent No.4, is part and parcel of the village and as such the villagers have right over the land. This is not a public interest litigation as the petitioners were defendants in the suit and contested on their own right as being in occupation. The petitioners have not been able to show any right or title over the land in question. The orders, which they have impugned, may have been passed beyond jurisdiction but the approach of the petitioners is mala fide and the hands are tainted. They have not approached the Court with clean hands. Muhammad Umar, who was found to be in possession, was claimed to be the brother of the petitioners and this fact was not denied, and he has not been made party in these proceedings purposely. This is not difficult to ascertain as to why he has not been arrayed as one of the petitioners. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | C.P.714-K/2018 M/s Sessi United Staff Union Sindh (CBA) and another v. The Registrar Trade Unions and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | |
| 389 | Const. P. 1518/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Abdul Jabbar Shaikh (Petitioner) VS Govt; Of Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-NOV-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 390 | Const. P. 1178/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Ghulam Mustafa and others (Petitioner) VS Jashan Mal and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 26-OCT-18 | Yes | The question of the pendency of the suit and necessary registration under Section 18 of the Registration Act is misconceived since the decree had already been passed and as such the defence, as claimed in terms of the registration of an agreement of sale under Section 18 of the Registration Act was not available. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 391 | Const. P. 1335/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2013 | Muhammad Rizwan and another (Petitioner) VS Shahid Ali and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 27-NOV-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | C.P.13-K/2019 The Province of Sindh thr. Secy: Finance Deptt: Govt.of Sindh and another v. Muhammad Rizwan and others,C.A.1193/2019 The Province of Sindh thr. Secy: Finance Deptt: Govt.of Sindh and another v. Muhammad Rizwan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted.to be fixed after Summer vacation,Pending | ||
| 392 | Const. P. 415/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Ghulam Mehdi & others (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 27-NOV-18 | Yes | he subsequent judgment of the Member Board of Revenue dated 20.04.2017 not only ignored the order of his predecessor, but also ignored the fact that the suit, challenging the order of his predecessor, was also dismissed. These orders i.e. order of the Senior Civil Judge and more importantly the order of the Member Board of Revenue is implied res judicata as the subject matter of the appeal is nothing but the land which is defined as UA No.437 and 438. Here, it could safely be added that legally the litigation (s) are meant to decide controversies (issues). Where, the controversy / issue is that of general application and not limited to a party only then any decision thereon by a competent forum shall be binding upon all, including those who even were not before the legal forum / authority. A mere change of name of parties would never be sufficient to open a new round of litigation for the thing which otherwise stood decided by a lawful forum / authority. If this is ignored, there shall be no end to litigations and interested shall keep things hanging merely by substituting parties. An aggrieved however may get such decision reversed by appeal or reviewed, subject to law, but cannot seek another order from same forum / authority on plea of his being not a party to earlier lis. Any departure to such concept, shall result in frustrating the object of res judicata which otherwise has application in all matters, including Revenue jurisdiction. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | |||
| 393 | Const. P. 1929/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Kaleemullah Khoso (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 394 | Const. P. 2340/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Mashooque Ali Khoso (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 395 | Const. P. 5214/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Abdul Sattar Memon (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 396 | Const. P. 1948/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Imdad Hussain Bhatti (Petitioner) VS Chief Secretary Govt of sindh & ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 397 | Const. P. 965/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Sanaullah Soomro (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 398 | Civil Revision 76/2007 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2007 | Allah Bux and others (Applicant) VS Govt.of Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-OCT-18 | Yes | There is no cavil to the proposition that the entries were neither substantiated before trial Court nor before appellate Court and there was no reason to have relied upon those entries which have no basis as far as title is concerned and the appeal was rightly allowed and consequently the suit was dismissed. Similarly, taking into consideration the contentions of the learned State counsel regarding maintainability of suit, such being a question which is apparent on the face of it such as defect which is not curable and since it is legal, can be raised at any stage including revisional and appellate stage. There is no cavil to the proposition that Government functionaries / authorities are to be sued as required in terms of Article 174 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 as well as Section 79 CPC. In these proceedings, the Provincial of Sindh was sued through Deputy Commissioner which is not in consonance with the judgment of (1) Haji Abdul Aziz and (2) Government of Balochistan (supra) which provides a mechanism of suing the Government through Province of Sindh and through concerned Secretary to the Government. Commissioner under the hierarchy does not represent the Province in the manner as highlighted in the plaint and as such the objection raised by the learned State Counsel also goes on to prove that the suit at the very inception should have been buried as the legal mandatory formalities in terms of Section 79 CPC and Article 174 of the Constitution have not been complied. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.1463-K/2018 Allah Bux & others v. Government of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | |
| 399 | Const. P. 1180/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Abdul Jabbar (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 400 | Const. P. 1723/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Sher Ali Lashari & another (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 401 | Const. P. 1360/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Tajuddin Pathan (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-AUG-18 | No | The subject matter of this petition is a detection bill, which was apparently issued by Sukkur Electric Power Company. When inquired from the counsel for SEPCO as to under which authority such detection bill was issued, the counsel showed his ignorance. In pursuance of Sub???Section 6 of Section 26 of the Electricity Act, 1910, it is a discretion and mandate of the Electric Inspector to look into the matter on an application by an aggrieved party. Sukkur Electric Power Company was aggrieved of the consumption of electricity by illegal means and an application ought to have been preferred by them to the Electric Inspector, who then adjudge such complaint | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | |||
| 402 | 2019 YLR 574, 2019 SBLR Sindh 856 | M.A. 10/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Aurora Broadcasting Services (Pvt) Ltd (Appellant) VS PEMRA (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 23-APR-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 403 | Const. P. 572/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Mansoor Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 404 | Const. P. 4505/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Zainal Shah (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 405 | Const. P. 1073/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Piral Buriro (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pak through secretry wapda isb & ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-AUG-18 | No | In terms of Section 26 Sub-Section 6 of the Electricity Act, 1910, it is only the prerogative of the Electric Inspector to look into such issues that relates to electric equipments and its faultiness; and, the power generating or supplying companies cannot issue a detection or supplementary bill as it encroaches upon the Electric Inspector???s jurisdiction under Section 26 Sub-Section 6 of the Electricity Act, 1910 | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | |||
| 406 | Const. P. 2551/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2013 | Saeed Ahmed and others (Petitioner) VS Secretary Local Govt Department and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-NOV-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 407 | H.C.A 449/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Syed Waseem Ahmed (Appellant) VS Muhammad Shahnawaz & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-SEP-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | C.P.712-K/2019 K-Elecric Ltd. v. Muhammad Shahnawaz and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | ||
| 408 | Civil Revision 14/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Khadim Hussain (Applicant) VS Province Of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-MAR-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 409 | Const. P. 1823/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2016 | Jaman & others (Petitioner) VS Province of SIndh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.148-K/2017 Khan Muhammad v. National Accountability Bureau (NAB) thr. Its Chairman and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed Dismissed | ||
| 410 | Const. P. 2921/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2017 | Mohammad Mian Khalid (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 411 | Cr.J.A 81/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Karim Bux (Appellant) VS The State (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-NOV-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 412 | Const. P. 2419/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Ghazala Rehman (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 413 | Civil Revision 284/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Zafar Ali (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 03-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 414 | Const. P. 8908/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Pakistan Television Crop Ltd (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Habib Ahmed and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 02-FEB-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | C.P.2836/2021 M/s Pakistan Television Corporation Limited thr. Muhammad Atif, Senior Personnel Officer, Karachi v. Muhammad Habib Ahmed Khan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 415 | Criminal Appeal 96/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2015 | Shareef (Appellant) VS The State (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-DEC-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | Crl.P.5-K/2021 Sikandar Ali v. Shareef & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 416 | Const. P. 139/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Nadeem Zuberi (Petitioner) VS C.A.A (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 04-FEB-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | C.P.1156/2021 Civil Aviation Authority, Karachi v. Nadeem Zuberi,C.A.445/2021 Civil Aviation Authority, Karachi v. Nadeem Zuberi Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted.impugned judgement is suspended.to be fixed after 3 months,Pending Dismissed | ||
| 417 | Const. P. 1331/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Ali Murtaza and Others (Petitioner) VS Province Of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-JAN-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 418 | 2020 YLR 2188 | Const. P. 620/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2014 | The Fauji Foundation Charitable Trust (Petitioner) VS Federal Land Commission & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 09-APR-20 | Yes | Subject: Resumption of land under MRL 115 Fauji Foundation a "Charitable Trust" operating under endowment Act 1980 was functioning through a committee formed vide notification of 08.03.1972 of federal Government. Committee after deliberation resolved that secretary to act as authorized person. Unless otherwise explained, it does not deemed to have empowered /authorized secretary to further delegate the powers by a simple authority letter signed by Secretary alone, when it's not borne out of resolution. In the earlier petition when resumption of land was questioned, the parties withdrew their lis in view of negotiation which ended as 30 years leases of subject land and the cause of resumption deemed to have exhausted by way of doctrine of election, Petitioner opted for a long term lease instead to continue litigation against resumption of land .Such right (if any) was bartered with long term lease. Such right to challenge the resumption of land thus was not available when present petition was filed. Process of execution for long term lease should have followed requirement of MLR 115 and section 17 of Act II of 1977 and since it was not transparent, the two leases were executed in an unlawful manner and which period (30 years) has already been exhausted. Scheme of recovery of land revenue includes a process of attachment of holding against arrears which are due. Unless a remedy is exhausted, immediate jump to arrest and detention would not be justified. The question of declaring MLR 115 being repugnant to injunctions of Islamic law has already been decided but with its prospective effect as highlighted in the judgment of Qazalbash Waqf v. Chief Land Commissioner and the effective date was set as 23rd March, 1990 before which the process of resumption had already been completed yet long term leases were executed surrendering rights over the land. (if any) | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam | C.P.1751/2020 The Fauji Foundation, Charitable Organization under the Committee of Administration thr. Brig. (R) Sabir Ali, Fauji Foundation, Fauji Towers, Rawalpindi v. The Federal Land Commission thr. its Chairman, Islamabad and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned |
| 419 | Const. P. 4855/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Khyber Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 420 | Const. P. 4701/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s KTD (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 421 | Const. P. 1730/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Mubeen Ind & Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 422 | Const. P. 1793/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Farooq Ind and Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 423 | Const. P. 4678/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Habib Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 424 | Const. P. 5796/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Muhammad Tahir Construction Co. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 425 | Const. P. 6964/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Radium Silk Factory (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 426 | 2022 PTD 168 | Const. P. 3682/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Samad Pipe Ind (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-OCT-21 | Yes | Re-validation notice of bank guarantee was issued after a year of provisional assessment and unless final assessment or determination is made and placed for consideration, this re-validation notice of bank guarantee would be of no consequence i.e. even if it is revalidated there cannot be a question of its (bank guarantee???s) encashment on account of lapse of time for determining the duties and taxes finally in terms of Section 81 of Customs Act, 1969, as it prevailed at the relevant time. -- Had it been a case of final determination or final assessment, there was no occasion of releasing of consignment on securing differential amount through bank guarantee. The department should have asked for entire amount as being determined finally. This being the core issue, no satisfactory explanation was forwarded by respondent???s counsel for not complying with the requirements of Section 81 of the Customs Act, 1969. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.1676-K/2021 The Collector of Customs & another v. M/s. Samad Pipe Industries (Pvt) Ltd. & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending |
| 427 | Const. P. 3933/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Fazaia Housing Scheme Karachi (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 428 | Const. P. 4064/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | QICTL (Petitioner) VS FBR and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 429 | Const. P. 5001/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Amjad (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 430 | Const. P. 6076/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mehran Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 431 | Const. P. 5476/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Jamshed Farhad Irani (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 432 | Const. P. 27/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Trade Zone (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 433 | Const. P. 2139/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Hussain Formaids (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 434 | Const. P. 496/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Rehan Aziz Merchant (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 435 | Const. P. 948/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Muhammad Khalid S/o Wazir Ahmed Khan (Petitioner) VS The Court of IVth ADJ, Karachi Central and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-APR-21 | No | The objections were to the extent that in a family suit the plaintiff seeking Khulla cannot be represented by her attorney. Learned counsel in support of this contention has cited Rule 85 of the Sindh Civil Court Rules and Section 18 of the Family Courts Act, 1964. So far as the earlier Rule of Sindh Chief Court is concerned, the same is not applicable to the proceedings in hand as they are governed by the Family Courts Act, 1964 and perhaps there is no applicability of such rule even on merit. Similarly, so far as Section 18 of the Family Court Act is concerned, it enables a Pardah Nasheen lady to be permitted and represented by an authorized agent. This is an enabling provision and does not restrict the right of a plaintiff who intends to proceed the matter through an attorney to represent her in the court of law including a family suit for the dissolution of marriage. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 436 | Const. P. 4721/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Abbott Laboratories (Pakistan) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 437 | Const. P. 2364/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Goldway Hygiene Products (Petitioner) VS Collector of Customs and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 438 | Const. P. 1228/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Khurram Agencies (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 439 | Const. P. 5602/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/S Sahara Public Right Welfare (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 440 | Const. P. 4881/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Prepac Pakistan Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 441 | Const. P. 1960/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Syed Daanish Ghazi (Petitioner) VS F.B.R & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 442 | Const. P. 6192/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Tando Allayar Sugar Mills Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 443 | Const. P. 2616/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Sea King Shipping (Petitioner) VS Asstt: Collector of Custom and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-SEP-21 | Yes | Section 202 of Customs Act, 1969 does not extend its arms against a clearing agent acting in good faith without any collusion or negligence to cause financial loss to national exchequer. As observed, neither a show-cause was issued nor the assessment order declared such terms of recovery to be made against clearing agent. In fact the importer failed to substantiate his declared value in terms of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1969 read with Rule 109 of the Customs Rules, 2001. The declared value may have varied with the advice of Director General Customs Valuation however, the connivance of clearing agent to cause losses to national exchequer is missing. Not all such Goods declarations be categorized as false or untrue statement and hence require a burden to be discharged by customs officials, if such is attributed separately against importer and clearing agent. Not necessarily a declared value, which is objected by the customs officials be always considered to be a willful act of causing losses to national exchequer in terms of duties and taxes, however, a mechanism is provided to levy duties and taxes in terms of transactional value i.e. price actually paid or payable for the goods under section 25 of Customs Act, 1969 when sold for export from Pakistan, subject to provisos therein | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | |||
| 444 | Const. P. 5701/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Arshad Iqbal (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 445 | Const. P. 7008/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Ashraf (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 446 | Const. P. 3483/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Ajeet Kumar (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 447 | Const. P. 4011/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s GESCO Engineering Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS SRB and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 448 | Const. P. 4045/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | D to D Logistics Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 449 | Const. P. 6077/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mehran Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 450 | Const. P. 3969/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Brainchlid Communication Pak (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Othes (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 451 | Const. P. 5960/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Adam Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 452 | Const. P. 1348/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | National Foods Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 22-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 453 | Const. P. 5401/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Ghandhara Ind Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 454 | Const. P. 3491/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Kanhiya Lal (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 455 | I.T.R.A 60/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (Applicant) VS WASIM AHMED (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.1611-K/2021 Commissioner Inland Revenue Zone-V v. Waseem Ahmed Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 456 | Const. P. 1638/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/S Agar International (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 457 | Const. P. 5695/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Syed Muhammad Farooq Rafi (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 458 | Const. P. 4818/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Haji Nazir Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 459 | Const. P. 3981/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Falcon - I Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 460 | Const. P. 4507/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Dua Star Seafood (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 461 | Const. P. 5854/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Muneer (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 462 | Const. P. 4109/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Farah Jawed (Petitioner) VS FBR and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 463 | Const. P. 4769/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Zenith Chemicals Ind (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 464 | Const. P. 5404/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Packages Convertors Ltd (Petitioner) VS Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.5676/2021 Packages Converters Limited, Karachi v. Province of Sindh through the Secretary, Excise & Taxation Department Sindh Secretariat, Karachi and another,C.A.1647/2021 Packages Converters Limited, Karachi v. Province of Sindh through the Secretary, Excise & Taxation Department Sindh Secretariat, Karachi and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted. Interim Relied,Pending | ||
| 465 | Const. P. 5841/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Sheikh Muhammad Naeem and Others (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 466 | Const. P. 5578/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | M/s Creative Leather Ind. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 467 | Const. P. 4788/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Z.M International (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 468 | Const. P. 2204/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Julie (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 469 | Const. P. 136/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | SYED SHAFQAT ALI SHAH MASOOMI (Petitioner) VS CONTROLLER OF RENT & OTHERS (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 05-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 470 | Const. P. 4723/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Mazharuddin (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author) | C.P.299-K/2021 Mazharuddin v. Government of Sindh through Secretary Co-operation Sindh Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 471 | Const. P. 5152/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mrs. Khair un NIsa (M/s A.A Ship Breakers) (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 472 | Const. P. 4063/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | PICTL (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 473 | Const. P. 3980/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Falcon - I Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 474 | Const. P. 4065/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s English Biscuits Manufacturers Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 475 | Const. P. 5196/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Godil Cold Chain and Others (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 476 | Const. P. 5522/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Kohinoor Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 477 | Const. P. 5319/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | ENI Paksitan Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 478 | Const. P. 1184/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Spectrum Communication (Petitioner) VS Commissioner IR and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 479 | 2014 CLC 1714 | Suit 169/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | ABDUL REHMAN KHAN & OTHERS (Plaintiff) VS PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINE CORP. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 10-FEB-14 | Yes | In my view under the present facts and circumstances where a circular has been challenged which involves a common question of fact and since involves common grounds, it certainly involve common question of law as such is covered by Order 1 Rule 1 CPC. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 480 | Const. P. 6160/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Bakhtiar Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 481 | Suit.B 2/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | UNITED BANK LTD (Plaintiff) VS FASHIONWEAR (PVT) LTD & OTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 18-SEP-15 | Yes | Contents of the plaint as well and it appears that the defendant has evasively denied his liabilities in the leave to defend application which is not requirement of Order VIII Rule 4 CPC. Under the law every allegation of fact in the plaint should be denied specifically and if not it would amount to an evasive denial. ---Insofar as the claim of the mark up is concerned as it should be strictly subject to agreement as in chart given as the plaintiff has not cited any agreement to entitle them to claim mark up as sought, however no dispute with cost of funds from the date of default | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 482 | Const. P. 4517/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Omar Khalil Jan (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 483 | Cr.Tran 47/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | MUHAMMAD ALI S/O MUHAMMAD ASHFAQUE (Appellant) VS THE STATE THROUGH P.G SINDH (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 05-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 484 | Const. P. 577/2009 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | Shoukat Ali S/o Muhammad Alam. (Petitioner) VS Province Of Sindh (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 06-DEC-12 | Yes | The question of deletion of section 28-A of the Act and application of newly inserted proviso to section 16 is directly related to such question as to what could be the right time to determine the value of the land, which is to be acquired for public benefit. Will the intended desire of the acquisition authority be the right time; would the survey of the land to adjudge its suitability be the right time; or would it be the date of notification or would it be actual physical possession to be the right time. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 485 | Const. P. 4571/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Syed Iftikhar Ahmed (Petitioner) VS M.D PPL & another (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 486 | Const. P. 329/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | Clariant Pakistan Ltd (Petitioner) VS The Court of Commissioner Workmen of anaother (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-MAY-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 487 | Const. P. 144/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Muhammad Anwar S/o Muhammad Sarwar (Petitioner) VS Mazhar Ali B. Chohan & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 23-FEB-18 | Yes | The reliance on the agreement that petitioner had entered into with son of respondent No.2 is of no help as an agreement does not confer any title or a permission to have possession of the premises, which otherwise is owned by the respondent No.1. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 488 | Const. P. 526/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Major Mehmood Kashif Ali (Petitioner) VS Mst.Sana Mehreen and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 19-DEC-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 489 | 2019 SBLR Sindh 1466 | Suit 874/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Nadeem Ahmed Chowdry. (Plaintiff) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 17-NOV-16 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 490 | Const. P. 885/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Nazia Munsif (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-DEC-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | ||||
| 491 | Const. P. 4985/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Noorullah (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 492 | Const. P. 5328/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | International Pleasure Motor (Petitioner) VS FBR and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 493 | Const. P. 4830/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s K.P Services (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 494 | Suit.B 43/2007 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2007 | ASKARI COMMERCIAL BANK (Plaintiff) VS ZAFAR AHMED & ORS. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 19-NOV-12 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 495 | Const. P. 4426/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Chamber Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 496 | Const. P. 914/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | Sardar & Ors (Petitioner) VS Masood Hussain Antria (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 15-NOV-17 | Yes | it is also a well settled that Constitution Petition cannot be considered as a regular appeal and hence question of facts cannot be appreciated the way they could be appreciated in appeal. The scope of the petition is limited to the extent as if any piece of evidence was misread or that the jurisdiction was not exercised in accordance with law | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 497 | I.T.R.A 30/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (Applicant) VS M.R RANJEET KUMAR S/O SRI CHAND CO, (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 498 | Const. P. 968/2010 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | Kamran Khan (Petitioner) VS Governor Sindh/Chancellor University of Karachi (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-DEC-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | C.P.108-K/2020 Kamran Khan v. Govt. of Sindh / Chancellor University of Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 499 | H.C.A 198/2009 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | Gulzar Muhammad (Appellant) VS Malik Abdul Haque. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-MAY-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 500 | 2016 YLR 748 | Suit 164/1996 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 1996 | LT.CDR.MIRZA MANSOOR HUSSAIN (Plaintiff) VS S.MUHAMMAD FAHEEM (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 18-SEP-15 | Yes | I am of the view that though the defendants No.3 & 4 have not opted to issue public notice before purchase of property however it would be difficult to assume that it was done in bad faith, particularly when the record of the DHA shows the alleged entitlement of defendant No.2 to sale. Off course the defendants No.3 & 4 could not have traced the forgery as now come on surface. More importantly the defendants No.3 and 4 still are in occupation of the premises in question and raised construction at the relevant time. Had there been an iota of fraud they would have got away in these six years i.e. from 1990 to 1996. Since public notice is not considered as a legal requirement it cannot be stretched down to the wire that it was in fact in bad faith. Therefore, it cannot contribute towards mala fide which could cast any shadow on his bona fide. Hence, I am of the view that the issue No.4A is decided in affirmative that the defendant is a bona fide purchaser without notice. The plaintiff is however entitled to claim damages, which are to be calculated according to the market value of the subject plot. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 501 | Const. P. 825/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Digri Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-SEP-21 | No | Petitioner???s counsel has placed before us a letter dated 11.12.2019, which was issued in pursuance of Section 40B of the Sales Tax Act,1990 to monitor different Sugar Mill which include the Petitioner as well. In the instant petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.01.2019 issued by the Commissioner Inland Revenue, with the contention that Commissioner Inland Revenue after the amendment in the ibid law, through Finance Act, 1990 does not enjoy powers and authority. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | |||
| 502 | Const. P. 6452/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Ghulam Rasool Bhagat (Petitioner) VS Fed of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 05-DEC-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | ||||
| 503 | Const. P. 4573/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s PSO (Petitioner) VS Abdul Baseer and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 11-NOV-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | C.P.13-K/2020 M/s Pakistan State Oil Company Limited v. Abdul Baseer and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 504 | Const. P. 3786/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | M/s Rajby Industries (Petitioner) VS Sajjad Ali And ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 30-OCT-19 | Yes | The private respondents in these cases were gatekeepers and labours respectively and were terminated in terms of Section 12(3) of the Standing Order, 1968, thus it is not an ???industrial dispute??? which could empower the Commission to assume and exercise its jurisdiction in terms of Sections 54 and 57 of the IRA, 2012. Such provisions empowering the Commission in terms of Sections 54 and 57 of the IRA, 2012 were also in existence well before its promulgation and also while the provisions of IRO(xxiii) of1969 were in existence. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry | C.P.683-K/2019 M/s Rajby Industries v. Sajjad Ali and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | |
| 505 | Const. P. 5169/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Metro International (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 506 | Const. P. 5170/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Surriya Textile (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 507 | Cr.Bail 463/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | SHAFQAT ALI S/O NOOR AHMED (Applicant) VS THE STATE (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-APR-21 | Yes | Though the FIR is absolutely silent as far accusation against the applicant is concerned but the investigation reveals that it is a dispute of a plot in question primarily between Faizan who disclosed his name as Kamran, one of the co-accused and the two property dealers i.e. Shafqat Ali, the applicant and Iftikhar, the complainant. The facts of the case are such that it cannot be ruled out that the applicant Shafqat Ali was made hostage and that is the reason that the Call Data Record shows his presence within the crime scene. Be that as it may, it appears to be a case of further inquiry as there is no direct accusation against the applicant in the FIR. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | Crl.P.79-K/2021 The State v. Shafqat Ali Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | |
| 508 | Const. P. 6139/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Panjwani International (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 509 | Const. P. 6643/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s SAMBA Bank Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 510 | Const. P. 7633/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Rasheed (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 511 | Const. P. 7329/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Habib Metropolitan Bank (Petitioner) VS SRB and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 512 | Const. P. 6523/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Ahmed Fine Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 513 | Const. P. 6580/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Quality Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 514 | Const. P. 309/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Lucky Star Steel Ind. (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 515 | Const. P. 6073/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Al Haadi Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 516 | Const. P. 1664/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Al-Asar Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 517 | 2013 CLC 316 | Suit 1702/2000 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2000 | MRS. NAJMA VASEEM ADANWALA. (Plaintiff) VS MRS. ABIDA JAWAD (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 24-SEP-12 | Yes | At one hand the plaintiff claimed that he was and is ready to perform the part of her obligation pursuant to which she had issued notices at the address provided by the defendant and on the other hand she failed to deposit such amount in Court which she was willing to pay her. If the plaintiff could be exempted from the payment of Rs.1 Million at the required time on account of non-availability of the address or on account of the avoidance for the registration of the sale deed than at least the time when she filed suit, she should have come forward and should have deposited the sum of Rs.1 Million in Court. The fact that she was/is enjoying the possession of the said property, it became all that important for her to discharge this obligation as her first priority, which she failed but this non-deposit in Court does not constitute breach of agreement. The Court is also conscious of the fact that the plaintiff has not just made the payment of the token amount, in fact she has paid 60% of the total sale consideration against which the possession was handed over to her. This 60% was utilized by defendant. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 518 | 2022 PTD 576 | Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 2/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | IMS Health Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. (Applicant) VS Commissioner-II SRB (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 29-NOV-21 | Yes | It is the consideration in money including federal and provincial duties and taxes which constitute value of taxable services which the person provides against the consideration but it excludes the amount of sales tax under the ibid Act. The Tribunal was of the view that the invoices generated on the amount includes the expenses/expenditures plus 10-% service charges and is to be taken as one revenue component for services rendered. The Tribunal is also of the view that in certain cases there is specific rule in Sindh Sales Tax on Services Act, 2011 providing for valuation of a particular service and providing a certain minimum threshold and also any exemption and exception. However, Tribunal considered that since no rule is available for the category of ???Business Support Services??? full value of generated invoices shall be taken as the value of services rendered or provided in terms of provisions of Section 5 ibid. --Primarily value of service charges for the purposes of Act 2011 is governed by the value of service agreed upon between the provider and the recipient as the market itself is so competitive that nothing could defeat the actual amount being declared to be taxed. However, in case such understanding of value of service is doubtful as it does not disclose correct value of service, it was open for the department to have considered the open market price of such service as required to be determined under section 6 of Sindh Sales Tax on Services Act, 2011 which is not the case here. Two provisos to Section 5 deals the situation of value of service. In a situation where the consideration of value of service is in kind or is partly in kind and partly in money, value of service shall mean open market price2 excluding the amount of sales tax under Act 2011. Similarly in case where service is provided by provider to a recipient who is an associated person and the value is not the actual value of service, then the value of service which is being provided by a provider to a non-associated person shall be counted and in case no consideration is claimed or value is lower than it is being provided by other persons, the value of service shall be of open market. In principle the department has not disputed the value of services rather the department is of the view that reimbursed amount or the amount of maintenance/expenses incurred should be made part of the value of the service. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||
| 519 | Const. P. 6956/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s International Brands Distributions (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 520 | Const. P. 4902/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Hameed Haroon (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 521 | Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 314/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Commissioner I-R Zone-II (Applicant) VS M/s. Dewan Cement Limited dewan Centre Khi (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 522 | Const. P. 7263/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Pharma Net (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 22-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 523 | Const. P. 6142/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | International Packaging Films Ltd (Petitioner) VS Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.5605/2021 International Packaging Films Limited Karachi v. Sindh through the Secretary, Excise & Taxation Department Sindh Secretariat, Karachi and another,C.A.1608/2021 International Packaging Films Limited Karachi v. Sindh through the Secretary, Excise & Taxation Department Sindh Secretariat, Karachi and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted. Interim Relief,Pending | ||
| 524 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 704/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Director DG I&I (Customs) (Applicant) VS Abdul Hameed Sheikh & another (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 26-NOV-21 | Yes | Had it been registered then perhaps the lawful presumption would have attached to such registered document but no such document constitute evidentiary value for the purposes of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal as such data of all the aforesaid documents are different and distinguishable and are not reconcilable. The impugned orders, at least of the Tribunal, is not clear at all, particularly as to on what basis the vehicle is being released as the Motor Vehicle Tax Slip, Annexure-D to the memo of Reference, discloses the identity of the subject vehicle as Toyota Crown as against claimed vehicle Toyota Surf Jeep. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | |||
| 525 | Const. P. 4892/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Mrs. Shazia Haroon (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 526 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 432/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Collector of Customs MCC of Preventive (Applicant) VS Kamran Khan (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 527 | Const. P. 5834/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Khawaja Anver Majid (Petitioner) VS F.B.R & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 528 | Const. P. 6526/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Ahmed Fine Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 529 | Const. P. 9020/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Talha Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 530 | Const. P. 3485/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Shaikh Impex (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 531 | Const. P. 6934/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Avaises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 532 | Const. P. 4628/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Khuwaja Anwar Majid (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 533 | Const. P. 6521/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Ahmed Fine Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 534 | Const. P. 6946/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Khamiso Khan & Co. (Petitioner) VS SRB and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 535 | Const. P. 7124/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Rubicon Builders & Developers (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 536 | Const. P. 3254/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Amanullah (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 537 | Const. P. 7063/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Shah Transport Network (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 538 | Const. P. 6463/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Khyber Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 539 | Const. P. 758/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi; attached cases: CP.NO D: 874 of 2017 | 2017 | Mst. Ambreen (Petitioner) VS Honourable Court of VIth ADJ Khi Central & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-NOV-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 540 | Const. P. 2471/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s PSO Co. Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.220-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. M/s. Pakistan State Oil Company Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 541 | Const. P. 7353/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s ISRA Islamic Foundation (Guarantee) (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 542 | Const. P. 2413/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Puma Energy Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.216-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Puma Engery Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 543 | 2022 PTD 290 | Const. P. 5113/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | OBS Pakistan Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 17-NOV-21 | Yes | The impugned Circular has only restored the process of Section 170 of Ordinance 2001 for claiming refund only however actions which have already been taken thereunder are not open for a scrutiny at least under Section 221 of Ordinance 2001. For convenience however we may say that impugned Circular has prospective effect only. The adjustments made and allowed on the basis of Circular 4 cannot be subjected to provisions of Section 221 of Ordinance 2001. Applications made under section 170 of Ordinance 2001 for refund has the limitation of three years in terms of Section 170(2) i.e. deemed assessment or when tax was paid whereas deemed assessment itself could be subjected to amendment within five years of such deemed assessment hence the purpose which cannot be achieved under Section 170 is available under other provisions of Ordinance 2001. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.139-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Sanofi-Aventis Pakistan Limited,C.P.70-K/2022 The Commissioner Inland Revenue, (Legal) v. OBS Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed,Pending Dismissed |
| 544 | Const. P. 6896/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Fuzail Ahmed Qadir (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 545 | Const. P. 7342/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Project Managers (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 546 | Const. P. 2310/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | National Refinery Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.309-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. National Refinery Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 547 | Const. P. 3699/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Crete Sol (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 548 | Const. P. 1685/2011 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | Dewan Salman Fibre Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 549 | Const. P. 4752/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Tipu Sultan (Petitioner) VS Chief Sect: Govt. of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-FEB-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 550 | Suit 1991/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | REHANA FIRDAUS & OTHERS (Plaintiff) VS MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 22-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 551 | Const. P. 5488/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Kashif Younus (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 552 | Const. P. 4747/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Haleem Sheikh (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 553 | Const. P. 2100/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M.A.K Azmati (Petitioner) VS IIIrd ADJ Karachi South & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 05-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 554 | Suit 359/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | PAK ARAB FERTILIZERS LTD. (Plaintiff) VS DAWOOD HERCULESS LTD. & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 09-OCT-14 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 555 | Const. P. 737/2009 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2009 | University Of Sindh and an Others (Petitioner) VS Senior Member Board Of Revenue Hyd and Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-NOV-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 556 | Const. P. 195/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: C.P. No.S-196 of 2010 C.P. No.S-205 of 2010 C.P. No.S-725 of 2011 C.P. No.S-726 of 2011 C.P. No.S-757 of 2011 C.P. No.S-758 of 2011 C.P. No.S-759 of 2011 C.P. No.S-764 of 2011 C.P. No.S-862 of 2011 | 2010 | Aziz Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Anjuman-e-Imania & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 09-MAR-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 557 | Civil Revision 63/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2009 | Haji Qamaruddin (Applicant) VS D.P.O. and an Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 558 | Civil Revision 79/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | Mst. Rukhsana (Applicant) VS Nasir Hussain & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 12-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 559 | Civil Revision 199/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2015 | Farshad Hussain Qureshi (Applicant) VS Mst Zubeda Shah & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 02-NOV-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 560 | Civil Revision 310/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2016 | Ahmed Saeed Qureshi (Applicant) VS Abdul Salam and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 03-NOV-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 561 | R.A (Civil Revision) 84/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | Allah Warayo (Applicant) VS Muhammad Anwar & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-AUG-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 562 | J.M 48/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Jahanzeb. (Applicant) VS Muhammad Jamil Qasim & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 14-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 563 | Const. P. 7222/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s AAD Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 564 | Const. P. 469/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: CP D.256/2010 | 2012 | Mehboob Ali & Others (Petitioner) VS Province Of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-AUG-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 565 | Const. P. 275/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Saleem Ahmed S/o Shujauddin (Petitioner) VS Jama Masjid Muhammadi & Madrasah Tehfeesz-ul-Quran (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 12-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 566 | Const. P. 3227/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Abdul Rasool and Ors (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-FEB-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 567 | II.A. 94/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Mst. Rabia & others (Appellant) VS District Judge Dadu & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 09-NOV-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 568 | Cr.Bail 696/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | ALI SHER S/O SYED KAREEM DAD (Applicant) VS THE STATE (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-MAY-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 569 | Const. P. 1904/2010 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Province Of Sindh & Others (Petitioner) VS Shabbir Ahmed & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 02-DEC-20 | Yes | The amount allegedly deducted as government policy as 25% was held to be unlawful. The petitioner intend to travel beyond the judgment and decree wherein neither such defence was taken nor the deduction of the amount of Rs.1,78,415/- being 25% of the entire amount of respondent was held as lawful deduction in terms of the government policy. The petitioner cannot travel beyond decree which was neither challenged by the petitioner nor it is otherwise unlawful. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | |||
| 570 | Const. P. 255/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Nazeer Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-JAN-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 571 | Const. P. 4963/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Atlas Metal (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 572 | II.A. 49/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Younus Dawood S/o Ali Muhammad Dawood (Appellant) VS Arif Abid and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-MAY-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.108-K/2022 M/s Huffaz Seamless Pipe Industries v. Province of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 573 | Const. P. 4169/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Javed Saeed (Petitioner) VS Commissioner I.R & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 574 | Const. P. 1711/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Premier Mercantile Services Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.1667-K/2021 The Province of Sindh through Chairman Sindh Revenue Board & others v. M/s. Premier Mercantile Services (Pvt) Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Notice | ||
| 575 | Const. P. 794/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2017 | Muhammad Ismail (Petitioner) VS Secretary/Chairmain Ministary of Railway & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 576 | Const. P. 4199/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Mst. Farukh Sultana (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 577 | Const. P. 845/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Mst Henna Hassan & Other (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 578 | Const. P. 458/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: C.Ps No.D-530, 573, 575, 576, 577, 578, 586, 587 , 652, 653, 654, 667, 675, 678, 681, 713, 732, 736, 751, 760, 763, 767, 769, 771, 774, 776, 778, 779,781, 782, 789, 790, 798, 801, 802, 803, 807, 808, 811, 812, 813, 817, 819, 820, 823, 829, 831, 833, 834, 836, 843, 844, 846, 848, 852, 853, 855, 856, 858, 860, 862, 863, 872, 883, 884, 885, 887, 891, 892, 893, 894, 895, 897, 918, 959, 1013, 1053 &1059 of 2022 | 2022 | Jia Ram Bagari (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh another (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 579 | Suit 50/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | BRIGADIER (RETIRED) AHMED RASHID KHAN (Plaintiff) VS BILAL SOLEJA (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 580 | Const. P. 571/2009 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2009 | Mst.Zubeda Begum Thr: her LRS.Shahzad Badar & Ors (Petitioner) VS Sye Saeed Ahmed and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 581 | Const. P. 546/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Khursheed Begum & Ors (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 582 | Const. P. 210/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Syed Hasnain Mehmood (Petitioner) VS Addl Commissioner-I Hyderabad and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 583 | Suit 254/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | PROF. DR. ANEELA ATTA UR RAHMAN (Plaintiff) VS PROVINCE OF SINDH & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 21-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 584 | Suit -1937/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | GHULAM RASOOL (Plaintiff) VS NAUMAN SHAIKH & ANOTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 17-JAN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | ||||
| 585 | Const. P. 226/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | ISLAMUDDIN (LATE) THR LEGAL HEIRS (Petitioner) VS VIITH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSION JUDGE & OTHER (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 586 | Const. P. 2755/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Faheem Akhtar (Petitioner) VS Irfan Masood & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 31-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 587 | 2015 CLC 916 | Execution 49/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | M/S.SAUDI ARABIAN AIR LINES (Decree Holder) VS M/S.INT.MARKETING (Judgment Debtor) | S.B. | Judgement | 02-SEP-14 | Yes | "Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXI, Rr. 22 & 66---Execution petition---Sale of attached property---Objections---Notice to Judgment-debtor to settle terms of sale---Necessity---Deposit of decretal amount, application for---Constructive res judicata, principle of---Applicability---Contention of judgment-debtor was that neither notice for sale proclamation nor for settling terms of sale were issued---Validity---No notice under O.XXI, R.66, C.P.C. was issued to the judgment-debtor nor such application had been preferred---Decree-holder was bound to apply for a notice under O.XXI, R.66, C.P.C. so that judgment debtor had an opportunity of raising objection to the sale, if any, or assist in settling terms to sale--- Judgment-debtor was entitled for notice to settle terms of sale proclamation---Judgment-debtor would lose right to object the execution petition after his service through public notice---Service of earlier notice would not take away the right of judgment-debtor to claim notice when property was put to auction---Sale could not be considered to be a valid sale in absence of notice under O.XXI, R.66, C.P.C.---When the judgment-debtor, in response to the notice, failed to appear, he was precluded by the rule of constructive res judicata from raising such objection at a later time and not by virtue of notice under O.XXI, R.66, C.P.C.---Non-compliance to the provisions of O.XXI, R.66, C.P.C. might vitiate the sale on account of material irregularity---Application for deposit of decretal amount was accepted in circumstances." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 588 | 2015 CLD 1849 | Suit.B 29/2005 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2005 | THARPARKAR SUGAR MILLS LTD. (Plaintiff) VS N.D.F.C. & ORS. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 18-NOV-14 | Yes | "Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss. 9, 19, 22 & 27---State Bank of Pakistan, BPD Circular No.29 dated 15-10-2002---Suit for declaration and injunction---Auction of property---Plaintiff company filed application for restraining defendant Bank from auctioning its property to recover outstanding amount in pursuance of decree passed in an earlier suit---Plea raised by plaintiff company was with regard to applicability of State Bank of Pakistan, BPD Circular No.29 dated 15-10-2002---Validity---Enforcement of BPD Circular No.29 by individual Banks to their respective customers was in fact the prerogative of Banks and it was for them to decide whether such debt outstanding against customer was a lost debt or recoverable in terms of assets mortgaged with them---State Bank of Pakistan, BPD Circular No.29 was binding once the Bank reached to a decision that such debt was not recoverable or a lost category and then procedure and perameters as laid down therein were to be adopted as a binding parameter but prima facie not in terms of its mandatory application---Judgment. and decree passed in earlier suit could not be made subservient to the outcome of present suit in terms of Ss. 22 & 27 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Any mode whereby consent decree passed in earlier suit was sought to be deferred, modified, altered and reviewed was violative of law--??Application was dismissed in circumstances." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 589 | Suit 1057/2008 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2008 | MRS. UZMA NASIR (Plaintiff) VS REHAN AHMED JANJUA & ORS. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 16-APR-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 590 | Const. P. 1492/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Ghulam Muhammad (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 591 | Suit 2489/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Syed Murshad Ali. (Plaintiff) VS Bank Islami & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 08-FEB-16 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 592 | Const. P. 4549/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | MCB (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 593 | Const. P. 1757/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Mst Nagina ( Khi To Hyd ) (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 594 | Const. P. 6107/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Khalid Mahmood (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 595 | Const. P. 2610/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Misbah Cosmetics Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 596 | Const. P. 1152/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Ashrafia & Co. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 597 | Const. P. 1298/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Ghulam Noor S/o Juma Khan (Petitioner) VS IInd Rent Controller, Karachi East and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 30-JAN-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 598 | Const. P. 1904/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2013 | Qamar Arslan Aziz (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 599 | Const. P. 2068/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Abdul Waheed (Petitioner) VS Abdul Waheed and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 02-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author) | ||||
| 600 | Suit 1748/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Khadim Hussain. (Plaintiff) VS Sindh Bank Limited & another. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-MAY-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 601 | Suit 2445/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Ali Abbas Jaffri (Plaintiff) VS Pakistan Employees Cooperative Housing Soc. & ORS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 16-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 602 | Suit 1075/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Mst. Feroza (Plaintiff) VS Sajid Ali Khan & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 08-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 603 | Const. P. 1335/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Mst Shah Jehan (Petitioner) VS IVth ADJ (MCAC) Khi Central & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 604 | Const. P. 4150/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Jaun Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 605 | Const. P. 68/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Mst. Dhanjani Yasmeen and others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 606 | Suit 1007/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Syed Asif Shah. (Plaintiff) VS Mrs. Feroza & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 10-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 607 | Suit 2150/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | ABDUL RAUF ESSA (Plaintiff) VS MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ YOUSUF & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 608 | 2022 CLC 1322 | Suit 648/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Muhammad Idrees Abbasi (Plaintiff) VS Syed Akbar Khan & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 18-FEB-22 | Yes | Section 12(2) CPC provides a bar where plaintiff is precluded by rule from instituting a further suit in respect of any particular cause of action and shall not be entitled to institute a suit in respect of such cause of action in any court to which this code applies. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 609 | R.A (Civil Revision) 98/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | The Hyderabad Municipal Corporation & Ors. (Applicant) VS M/S Trends Limited & Another. (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 610 | Const. P. 6453/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Abdul Ali (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 611 | Const. P. 1155/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Muhammad Aslam (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 612 | R.A (Civil Revision) 46/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2018 | Province of Sindh & others (Applicant) VS Mubarak Khan (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 613 | Const. P. 238/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Waris Ali (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 614 | Const. P. 2968/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Cavish Security Service (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Sindh and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.579/2022 Sindh Revenue Board Through Chairman, Karachi v. Cavish Security Service (PVT) Ltd. and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (Notice) for an early date. Club with CP 414/21 etc | ||
| 615 | Suit 1988/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Parvez Kurshid. (Plaintiff) VS Bank Al Falah Ltd.(ISSUES) (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 10-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 616 | Suit 142/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | MALIK ITTEHAD COOPERATIVE HOUSING LIMITED (Plaintiff) VS PROVINCE OF SINDH & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 15-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 617 | Const. P. 6052/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Pakistan Steel Mills Corp (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Arif And ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-JAN-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 618 | Const. P. 136/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2011 | Naeem Ahmed Bhambhro (Petitioner) VS Prov. of Sindh & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-NOV-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio(Author) | ||||
| 619 | R.A (Civil Revision) 6/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | M/s. Samta Siluer Trading Ptd. Ltd (Applicant) VS M/s. Adamjee Insurance Co Ltd & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 620 | R.A (Civil Revision) 239/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Amanullah. (Applicant) VS Province of Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 23-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 621 | Const. P. 1947/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Liaquat Ali (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-JUN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 622 | Const. P. 1770/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Rahim Bux (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-MAY-22 | Yes | A formal inquiry was ordered to be conducted. That order of de novo inquiry could have been passed only when authority was convinced that decision of dismissal was neither lawful and nor based on legitimate findings and unless such finding of facts are unearthed through de novo inquiry, the order of dismissal would be meaningless. De novo inquiry in fact impliedly means that the order was set-aside otherwise there was no wisdom or logic behind such formal inquiry. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | |||
| 623 | Const. P. 655/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Mst. Sana (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 624 | Const. P. 624/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Hyder Ali & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 625 | Judicial Companies Misc. 29/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Amir Bux Channa & Another through Attorney (Applicant) VS Isra Islamic Foundation (Guarantee) Limited. (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-FEB-23 | No | The disposal of contempt application whereby the contempt notice is discharged and contemnor is set free of consequences, does not mean that he is automatically restored to his position of a Registrar of University | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 626 | Const. P. 489/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Muhammad Ayoub (Petitioner) VS FED Of Pakistan & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 627 | Const. P. 1631/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Nawab Bazaid Hyder Bakht (Petitioner) VS Election Commission of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAY-22 | No | Delimitation Matter | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | |||
| 628 | Const. P. 854/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Khush Muhammad Jatoi (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 629 | Const. P. 1199/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: C.Ps. No. (D)-1207,1228,1229,1230 of 2022 Ramzan Ordinance cases | 2022 | Baitullah (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-APR-22 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 630 | Const. P. 537/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Ali Bux and others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 631 | Const. P. 730/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Aziz Ahmed Abro & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 632 | Const. P. 1602/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Muhammad Aslam (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 633 | Const. P. 646/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Sumaira & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 634 | Const. P. 1810/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Mst: Anam & another (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 635 | II.A. 20/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2014 | Al Haj Gulshan Ellahi (Appellant) VS Imdad Ali and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 24-AUG-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 636 | Adm. Suit 13/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | M/s. Agro Trade (Pvt) Ltd (Plaintiff) VS M.V POAVOSA WISDOM III & 3 Others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 26-JAN-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 637 | Const. P. 2639/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Ali Hyder (Petitioner) VS Govt Of Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 638 | H.C.A 196/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | Muhammad Yousuf Naz (Appellant) VS Aslam Gatta & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-JUN-22 | No | The impugned order being exparte ad-interim. Unless the rights are conclusively decided by the interim order or there is imminent danger arises out of exparte interim order and the property is likely to be wasted, interference at this stage, when application itself is yet to be heard and decided finally, should be avoided. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 639 | Suit 116/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | GUNVOR SINGAPORE PTE LTD (Plaintiff) VS PAKISTAN LNG LIMITED & ANOTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-FEB-23 | Yes | Procurement of LNG is a complexed but well settled process in international market. It has a limited and defined market and limited suppliers with a constant pressure of fluctuating market prices. The suppliers are never seen at losses and at times poll in windfall gains because of fluctuating market and this is how the system works. Realistically they (LNG supplier) do not end up in losses, unless a senseless decision is made. Pakistan like many other countries has a limited capacity to dock/store and transport LNG. ----The bid bond is an entirely independent contract to the bidding document and is enforced on the basis of the terms indicated in the bid bond. Bid term's validity and enforcement were not discharged on the Gunvor not being declared the most advantageous bidder on the opening of bid but endured itself for the entire period during which the bid remained valid i.e. up to 11.01.2021. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 640 | 2023 SBLR Sindh 263 | Suit 2637/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Tayyaba Motors (Pvt) Ltd. (Plaintiff) VS Regal Automobiles Industries & another. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 17-NOV-22 | Yes | The only concern of the plaintiff is that at the relevant time no notification was issued, which could identify the establishment of Tribunal if it was operating and functioning at the relevant time under section 16 of ibid Act, when the suit was filed. This is not borne out of the pleadings as no such grounds have been raised at the time of invoking jurisdiction of this Court. It was nowhere alleged that since there is no notification with regard to notifying the tribunal or appointment of presiding officer, therefore, plaintiff was compelled to file this suit. In the absence of such pleadings, it cannot be presumed or assumed that this Court had to exercise the jurisdiction, which jurisdiction otherwise vests with the Tribunal | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 641 | Const. P. 517/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Qadir Bux (Petitioner) VS Mst. Shazia & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 23-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 642 | Const. P. 669/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Gulzar Ali Laghari & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 643 | Const. P. 824/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Muhammad Qasim & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 644 | Const. P. 110/2007 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2007 | Abdul Lateef. (Petitioner) VS Shaukat Ali and Others. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 645 | Const. P. 424/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Mst. Gulnaz Ghouri (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 646 | Const. P. 1004/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Sabir Ali Sahito (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 647 | 2016 YLR 104 | II.A. 11/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2016 | Abdul Aziz (Appellant) VS Abdul Kareem & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 23-MAY-22 | Yes | Sale deed of appellant as being enjoyed by appellant cannot be set-aside automatically as the defence of the appellant is protected being buyer without notice of any dispute. As stated above it has to be proved independently through impartial evidence failing whereof the aforesaid provisions of law would protect the title of appellant. Section 27(b) is for enforcing performance against those who acquired title with knowledge of previous agreement/contracts, whereas section 41 of Transfer of Property Act protect title for those who acquired title without knowledge of previous litigation. Since it is a case of cancellation of sale deed I am of the view that section 41 of Transfer of Property Act is more appropriate for its application | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 648 | Suit 622/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | FAUZIA SAID KHAN & OTHERS (Plaintiff) VS SHAIZA SAID KHAN & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 26-AUG-22 | Yes | in the absence of any challenge to the declaration of gift executed by deceased himself during his life time along with signed transfer deeds, it is a futile attempt to grant any such injunction of the nature as argued, and not even prayed. No doubt the application itself has prayed for an order that the defendants be restrained from selling, transferring, disposing off or gifting in any manner, way or form the property, undertakings and assets of the company other than in accordance with law, which do not call for orders as prayed for on the strength of the shareholding of the company, which has not been disputed in the application. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 649 | Const. P. 1961/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2018 | Fahmeed Akhtar (Petitioner) VS Ist. Addl:D.J Sanghar & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAY-22 | Yes | The Appellate Court is burdened with more responsibility if a judgment is being set-aside then in case where the judgment is being upheld by him, as he could agree with the reasons assigned by the trial court. But when the judgment and decree is being set-aside then the strong reasons are required to be provided by the Appellate Court. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 650 | R.A (Civil Revision) 146/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Muhammad Hassan & other (Applicant) VS Liaquat Ali & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 02-NOV-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 651 | 2023 CLD 33 | Judicial Companies Misc. 18/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | N.P waterproof Industries Pvt ltd & others (Applicant) VS N.P spinning Mills limited & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-OCT-22 | Yes | Though this is not in dispute but the arguments put forward by learned counsel for petitioners is that by virtue of being a Muslim, shares automatically devolve upon the legal heirs of deceased shareholder. This perhaps may be a case under Muhammaden Law where rights are being acquired in respect of movable and immovable assets under general law, but in case where an entity is created by a special law, it is to be dealt with within that frame of special law. No provision of this special Act would take away any of their right under the general law but it laid down a procedure of its own because the entity is the creation of company law. The successor who intends to take advantage of any of its shareholding left by deceased has to go through a process prescribed by company law and that is Section 78 of the Companies Act, 2017 | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 652 | Const. P. 558/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: Delimitation Connected Matters | 2022 | Fahad Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 653 | Const. P. 628/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Sharmeen & another (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 654 | Const. P. 1600/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Syed Ghulam Nabi Shah (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 655 | Const. P. 1948/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Liaquat Ali (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-JUN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 656 | Const. P. 2655/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2015 | Anwar Naeem Ahmed Khan (Petitioner) VS Chief Executive Officer (HESCO) & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-MAR-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author) | ||||
| 657 | R.A (Civil Revision) 98/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Bahadur Khan Thr: LRs (Applicant) VS Haji Darya Khan Thr: LRs. (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-NOV-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 658 | Suit 570/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Mst. Alay Zahra. (Plaintiff) VS Karachi Development Authority & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 18-JAN-23 | Yes | Subsequent enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction of the Civil Courts of district Karachi including District East will not attract the jurisdiction in this case since at the relevant time the pecuniary jurisdiction was lawfully and rightly invoked. Consequential amendment under the ibid Act will not have a retrospective effect unless otherwise legislated accordingly | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 659 | Suit 1770/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | SAIMA AKBAR & ANOTHER (Plaintiff) VS SADIA RAFIQ & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 26-JAN-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 660 | Judicial Companies Misc. 4/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | THE CHANCELLOR MASTERS & SCHOLARS AND ANOTHER (Applicant) VS N/A (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 03-MAR-23 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 661 | Const. P. 4079/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Shakeel Ahmed Kanasa (Petitioner) VS Federal Tax Ombudsman and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 28-MAR-23 | Yes | Petitioners have neither been served any notice intimating them with regard to the complaints against which the investigations were to be conducted nor have been given fair opportunity to respond to the accusations of alleged maladministration and corrupt practices. Furthermore, the Federal Tax Ombudsman is authorized to summon record under section 10(9) of Ordinance 2000 and no reasons have been provided as to why the powers conferred therein have not been exercised and resort has been made directly to inspection of the petitioners offices. Indeed there must be some refusal by the petitioners to comply with Section 10(9) of the ibid ordinance before measures such as inspections are resorted to and/or a case has to be made out to jump/short-circuit the mechanics. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | |||
| 662 | 2016 CLC Note 10 | Suit 549/2008 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2008 | MOBEEN RAZA and another (Appellant) VS M/S. ALLOO & MINOCHER DINSHAW (Appellant) | S.B. | Judgement | 09-DEC-14 | Yes | Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Suit for negative declaration seeking only the disentitlement of defendants in suit property---Maintainability---Interpretation of S.42, Specific Relief Act, 1877---Plaintiff sought declaration to the effect that the defendants had no interest in the suit property and were not entitled to sell or dispose of, the same---Question before the High Court was whether plaintiffs could seek such negative declaration in relation to the disentitlement of the defendants without claiming in ownership , interest or legal character for themselves in relation to the suit property ---Held, that plaintiffs had not sought relief in respect of property in question for themselves, nor any legal character had been attributed to suit property, hence no entitlement in terms of S.42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 was available to the plaintiffs---Plaintiffs had sought declaration to the effect that defendants had no locus standi or right in relation to the suit property; however such prayer would not entitle the plaintiffs to file suit for declaration when they were not claiming any interest, title or legal character in the property, and especially when defendants had established their interest in the property by placing a registered sale deed---Suit for negative declaration was only maintainable in certain exceptional cases---When a plaintiff demonstrated some interest in the property to which some legal sanctity could be attached only then plaintiffs could seek some legal character in terms of S.42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877---Suit for declaration, in the present case, sought declaration to the disentitlement of the defendants, and was not maintainable---Suit was dismissed, accordingly. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 663 | Cr.Misc. 198/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Shafi Muhammad Shar (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 664 | Cr.Misc. 84/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Muhammad Aslam Khuhawar (Applicant) VS The State and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 665 | Civil Revision 69/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mevo Brohi (Applicant) VS PO Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 666 | Cr.Misc. 21/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Rehmatullah Leghari (Applicant) VS Arbelo Vighio and other (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 667 | Cr.Bail 82/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Zulifqar Ali Khoso and others (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 668 | Cr.Bail 238/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Riaz Magsi (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 01-FEB-13 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 669 | Const. P. 25/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Niaz Ali Khan Pathan (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 670 | Suit 14401/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | Shabana Yasmeen (Plaintiff) VS Defendant (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 26-JUN-12 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 671 | Const. P. 892/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Muhammad Hassan Mashori (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Bakrani and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 672 | Const. P. 99/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Abdul Wahab (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 673 | Cr.Bail 433/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Sajjad @ Sijoo Shaikh (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | Yes | Prima facie, it appears that the injury allegedly caused by the applicant is at the elbow of the right arm which went through and through and the medical report that has been read over by the learned State counsel is in fact to the extent that the fatal injury was one which is caused by Wahab which is the stomach injury in view of the above it has become a case of further enquiry despite the fact that the applicant???s bullet was allegedly hit at the elbow he, at this stage could not be presumed to have come with the intention to kill unless such contention is proved in evidence. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 674 | Const. P. 110/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Tabbasum Jakhrani and another (Petitioner) VS SHO Garhi Khairo PS District Jacobabad and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 675 | Const. P. 120/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Asia Khatoon Brohi and another (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Rehmatpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 676 | Cr.Appeal 71/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2009 | Ashique chandio & an ors. (Petitioner) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | ||||
| 677 | Const. P. 118/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Sarfraz Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 678 | Const. P. 2604/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Mst; Amina and another (Petitioner) VS S.H.O PS Waleed and ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 679 | Const. P. 968/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Ali Nawaz Tagar (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Rehmatpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 680 | Const. P. 985/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Samreen and others (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Shahdadpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 681 | Const. P. 551/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mst Koonj Jagirani (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Taluka and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 682 | Const. P. 87/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Dr Shakeela Bhatti (Petitioner) VS Senior Superintendent of Police Larkana and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 07-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 683 | Suit 352/2000 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2000 | plaintiff (Plaintiff) VS Defendant (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 19-NOV-13 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 684 | Const. P. 290/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Main Fakir Muhammad Mahar (Petitioner) VS SP Shikarpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 685 | Const. P. 309/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Mst. Aisha Narejo and others (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Taoojadero and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 686 | Civil Revision 45/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Mahfooz Ali Rajput (Petitioner) VS Ghulam Nabi and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 687 | Const. P. 1040/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Haji Gulab Shar (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Geehalpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 688 | Const. P. 32/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Akhtiar Hussain (Petitioner) VS SIP Imamuddin Chandio PS Waleed & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 689 | Cr.Misc. 249/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Abdul Ghafoor Bangulani (Applicant) VS The state and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 690 | Const. P. 1064/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Abdul Sattar Sabzoi (Petitioner) VS S.H.O P.S Kandhkot and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 691 | Cr.Bail 21/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mir Hassan @ Meeral Korai (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 692 | Const. P. 115/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Sahib Khatoon (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Lakhi Gate Shikarpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 693 | Const. P. 107/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Ghulam Qadir Barejo (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Nasirabad and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 694 | Const. P. 554/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Peeral Chandio (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Mirokhan and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 695 | Const. P. 177/2010 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | Muhammad Azam Siddiqui and another (Petitioner) VS Mrs. Rana Ejaz and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 12-DEC-12 | Yes | The strength of the learned trial court order as well as of the appellate Court order is that one advocate namely Sardar Abdul Hameed Iqbal has filed an undertaking on behalf of the petitioner No.1. This could hardly be a ground to reject the application under section 12(2) CPC as primarily what is to be seen by the learned trial court as well as appellate Court is whether there was sufficient material in terms of the bailiff???s report which is available on record to hold the service good against the petitioners or not. The question of filing of undertaking on behalf of petitioners is of no material consequence as it can be a managed one since it is not signed by the petitioners. Hence the learned trial court while rejecting the application under section 12(2) CPC as well as appellate Court has mainly /relied on the undertaking given by one advocate. The learned trial court has decreed the suit for specific performance against the petitioners and has ordered for registration of the conveyance deed in favour of respondent No.1. Such valuable rights in this case which were taken away from the petitioners are at stak | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 696 | Civil Revision 317/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | Jethanand (Applicant) VS Mumtaz Ali & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-OCT-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 697 | 2016 PLD Sindh 532 | Suit 821/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Ayesha Solvent Plant (Pvt.) Limited (Plaintiff) VS Federation of Pakistan & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 04-MAY-16 | Yes | Pakistan Plant Quarantine Rules, 1976--- ----R. 8(1)(5)---Phytosanitary certificate---Place of origin, determination of---Principle---Goods in transit/re-export---Consignment in question consisted of soyabean of Brazil and US origin imported by an importer in Egypt and was off loaded at an Egyptian port---Relevant authorities of Brazil and USA had issued Phytosanitary certificates and on basis of same certificates, consignment was exported to Pakistan---Authorities declined to issue necessary plant protection release order in relation to consignment in question on the ground that origin of consignment was Egypt, not Brazil/USA therefore, Phytosanitary certificate had to be issued by Egypt, not Brazil/USA---Validity---Shipment from port of Egypt was being made after a delay of about six months and it might or might not be in transit---Provisions of R.8(1) of Pakistan Plant Quarantine Rules, 1967 required that such plant or plant material should carry official certificate from a plant quarantine authority of that country and did not only relate to a country where such plants or plant products were grown--- Place of origin varied according to situation and requirement of a Phytosanitary status---Place of origin under the Convention and Act referred to a place from where a consignment gained its Phytosanitary status where possibility of exposure to infestation or contamination of pests was evident and could not be ruled out---Place where commodity was grown was not always considered as place of origin---If a commodity was stored, its Phytosanitary status could change over a period of time as a result of its new location---In such cases, new location could change Phytosanitary status and might be considered as place of origin---Place of origin was dependent upon Phytosanitary status not place of growth---Commodity could gain its Phytosanitary status from more than one places and NPPO of all such countries providing certificates should decide about place or places of origin depending upon the situation that they had undergone which might have changed Phytosanitary status---Egypt was to be considered as place of origin for such shipment, and the definition of 'place of origin' in policy would not turn the situation unless such certificates were made available, authorities in Pakistan under Quarantine Act were justified in not issuing release order---In terms of R.8(5) Pakistan Plant Quarantine Rules, 1967, shipment arrived without certificate or declaration meant in R. 8(2) of Pakistan Plant Quarantine Rules, 1967 and with permit were liable to be confiscated or destroyed or to be returned to the port of origin at the expense of importer---Application was disposed of with order and observations by the High Court. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 698 | Const. P. 2839/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Azeem (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and otehrs (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-JAN-21 | No | recruitment process of Head Master/Head Mistress in BPS-17 and their participation in SPSC. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | |||
| 699 | Const. P. 849/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Nofil Nawaz Mulkana (Petitioner) VS Sana Maqbool & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-JUN-18 | Yes | The proceeding in the nature of summary trial does not mean that process of effecting service will only be a formality. It is but the initial pillar in the procedure to achieve disposal on merit after effecting service. The trial Court Judge should have made efforts and that should be seen to have been done by trial Court in effecting service though nothing is available on record as far as Bailiff???s report of ???refusal??? is concerned. There is nothing as far as reasoning is concerned as to why service was not effected at the address of Copenhagen and why address of the attorney Umer Al-Hamidi was considered as lawful. What convinced the trial Court to conclude that summons of the instant suit were to be served upon alleged attorney is mystery. The process of substituted service is not to be taken lightly by the trial Court. It is to be exercised only in case when it is required i.e. where the Court is satisfied with the reasons to believe that the defendant is keeping out of way for the purpose of avoiding service or that for any other reason summons cannot be served in the ordinary way the Court shall order for service of summons by: (a) affixing a copy of the summons at some conspicuous part of the house, if any, in which the defendant is known to have last resided or carried on business or personally worked for gain; or (b) any electronic device of communication which may include telegram, telephone, photogram, telex, fax, radio and television or (c) urgent mail service or public courier services??? or (d) beat of drum in the locality where the defendant reside; or (e) publication in press; or (f) any other manner or mode as it may think fit; | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 700 | Const. P. 1384/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Arshad Pervez (Petitioner) VS Kashif Mohammad Baig (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-AUG-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.82-K/2018 Kashif Muhammad Baig and others v. Arshad Pervez and others,C.P.1099-K/2018 Kashif Muhammad Baig and others v. Arshad Pervez and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed,Pending Leave Granted | ||
| 701 | Const. P. 1680/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Mrs. Tahmina Amir Khumbati & Another (Petitioner) VS Akbar Ali & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 25-MAY-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.876-K/2018 Mrs: Tehmina Amir Khambati and another v. Akbar Ali (decd) thr. his L.Rs and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 702 | Suit 2603/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Novartis Pharma Pakistan Limited (Plaintiff) VS Federation of Pakistan & another (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 19-DEC-16 | Yes | The drugs are being considered as essential commodities. These are always subject to regulations and unbridled ways of dealing with the prices and allowing market forces to set the prices cannot be granted. This could not be taken as violative of Article 18 or 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan. These are reasonable restrictions and are being protected under the Constitution as often it happens the cartels are formed to manipulate the situation of these ???essential commodities??? and hence are always subjected to reasonable restrictions. However, in Suit No.1217 of 2016 in which Mr. Anwar Mansoor Khan learned advocate is appearing wherein Policy itself has been challenged I would dispose of the injunction application in the following terms and keep the lis pending as an issue in relation to the vires of subject policy had not been framed. Any finding here would not influence the trial of this suit. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 703 | Suit 302/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | FatimaFert Limited (Plaintiff) VS Federation of Pakistan (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 03-MAR-17 | Yes | Thus, it is unanimous view that an order of suspension of the operation of the judgment and decree or leave granting order would not operate to have a binding effect on other parties; it could operate inter parties since the operation of the judgment and decree was suspended in a particular suit/appeal with reference to particular party. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 704 | Const. P. 1385/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Sohail Mohammad Younus (Petitioner) VS Kashif Mohammad Baig (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-AUG-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.83-K/2018 Kashif Muhammad Baig and others v. Sohail Muhammad Younus and others,C.P.1100-K/2018 Kashif Muhammad Baig and others v. Sohail Muhammad Younus and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed,Pending Leave Granted | ||
| 705 | 2021 PLD Sindh 13 | Const. P. 598/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | PROVINCE OF SINDH THROUGH SECRETARY EDUCATION (Petitioner) VS ISLAMIC EDUCATION TRUST & OTHERS (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 31-OCT-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.709-K/2017 The Province of Sindh thr. Secy: (Colleges) Education & Literacy Department v. The Islamic Education Trust and others,C.M.A.3636/2019 The Province of Sindh thr. Secy: (Colleges) Education & Literacy Department v. The Islamic Education Trust and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed,Pending Dismissed | |
| 706 | Const. P. 668/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Assadullah (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 707 | Const. P. 2092/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Zafar ALi Siyal (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 708 | Const. P. 85/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | CH: MUHAMMAD SHAFIUDDIN (Petitioner) VS MUHAMMAD ATEEQUE & OTHERS (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 28-FEB-18 | Yes | Section 8 provides determination of rent when all four or any one of them may exist. At times it is a cumulative effect of all four ingredients that may be taken in to consideration. One factor out of four may negate or cut off the effect of the other factor and hence it is the respective burden which is supposed to be discharged by the parties for having cumulative effect. If a party relying on any of the four factors of having negative effect, does not discharge burden, it does not restrict Rent Controller to pass order in determining fair rent on the basis of evidence on available factors. Once a fair rent is determined it cannot be said that it cannot be re-determined again under section 8 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, if the circumstances so warrants. There may or may not be fluctuation in the four ingredients after first determination under section 8 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 and hence could also be invoked subsequently by the parties if the circumstances so required. However, once the fair rent is determined, the provisions of section 9 would then be applicable with its limitations i.e. the first increase over and above fair rent should not be before three years and that too may not be in excess to 10% per annum and the future rent was also subject to the provision of Section 9(2) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 and hence the provisions of section 9(2) with its limitation would apply to fair rent and was ordered accordingly by the Rent Controller. Rent Controller applied the provision as required under section 9 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.321-K/2018 Ch. Muhammad Shafiuddin (Decd) thr. his L.Rs v. Muhammad Ateeque and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | |
| 709 | Const. P. 654/2004 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2004 | Chaudhary Iqbal Hussain (Petitioner) VS Dr. Ehtesham Naseerul Haque & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 20-OCT-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.5180/2017 Chaudhry Iqbal Hussain (decd) thr. LRS v. Dr. Ehtaesham Naseerul Haque & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 710 | 2018 PLD Sindh 251 | M.A. 39/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Liaquat Ali (Appellant) VS Mst. Huma Faiz and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 08-JAN-18 | Yes | Succession Certificate could have been granted only in respect of assets left by the deceased either in favour of widow or any of the brothers of deceased as deem fit and proper and the purpose of granting succession certificate was the distribution of assets amongst the legal heirs, which is not the case here at least for these financial heads which does not form assets of deceased. --Widow being nominee is entitled for such funds i.e. provident fund, gratuity, group insurance, welfare funds and benevolent fund without having any recourse of obtaining any succession certificate. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.28-K/2018 Liaquat Ali v. Mst: Huma Faiz and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed |
| 711 | Const. P. 599/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Phullan (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 712 | Const. P. 551/2009 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2009 | Moulvi Shahzado Drho (Petitioner) VS District Nazim Sukkur & orsd (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 713 | I. A 139/2003 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2003 | Muhammad Ayoub (Appellant) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-NOV-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.88-K/2017 Haji Baig Ali thr. his L.Rs and others v. WAPDA and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 714 | Const. P. 1316/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Zamir Hussain Mirani (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-JAN-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 715 | Const. P. 1506/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Shahzaib Ali Shah (Petitioner) VS Secretary Sindh Local Govt; & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 716 | Const. P. 838/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Nevand Ram (Petitioner) VS S.H.O Police & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-JAN-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 717 | Civil Revision 25/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2014 | Muhammad Rafique & anor (Applicant) VS Syed Warand Ali Shah & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 11-FEB-19 | Yes | Mutation itself does not create a title and a person driving title thereunder had to prove that the same was lawfully entered and attested, thus, no presumption of correctness was attached to the mutation entries till they are proved satisfactorily and independently through cogent evidence. Any subsequent entry or title on the basis of such entry of 1971 thus would also fall along with original sin. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 718 | Const. P. 999/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Mst Lal Khatoon (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 719 | Const. P. 7/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2019 | Rustam Ali Phulpoto (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 11-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 720 | Const. P. 1114/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2014 | Haji Ali Bux Shambani (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 721 | Const. P. 56/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2019 | Ali Hyder & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 722 | Civil Revision 46/1997 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 1997 | Allah Wadhayo Naich and others (Applicant) VS Mian Khan and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 07-DEC-18 | Yes | insofar as these ancillary reliefs followed by declaration are concerned that relate to the documents, the Civil Court and the appellate Court have rightly exercised their jurisdiction, but insofar as the possession is concerned, on the basis of pleadings and in terms of para 17 of the plaint, it is regulated by the Rent Controller in terms of Section 13 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 723 | Const. P. 1391/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Abdul Sami Kalhoro (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 724 | Const. P. 5188/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Miss Hina & others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 27-NOV-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | C.P.21-K/2019 The Province of Sindh thr. Secy: Finance Deptt: Govt.of Sindh and another v. Miss. Hina Qureshi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted.to be fixed after Summer vacation | ||
| 725 | Const. P. 2101/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Naveed Ahmed Mirbahar (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 726 | Const. P. 743/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Ali Sher Shanbani (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-NOV-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 727 | Const. P. 1600/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Syed Pir Shah (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 728 | Const. P. 2134/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Mumtaz Ali Mahar (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 729 | Const. P. 2357/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Shoaib Ali Lashari (Petitioner) VS Mir Muhammad & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-AUG-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 730 | Const. P. 2153/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Wajid Khan Mahar (Petitioner) VS Mst Salma & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-AUG-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 731 | Const. P. 3895/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Naseer Ahmed Phulpoto (Petitioner) VS Government of Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 732 | Const. P. 1137/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Allah Dino (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 733 | Const. P. 2624/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Syed Muhammad Ali Shah Bukhari (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 734 | Const. P. 4042/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Kamran Ali Shaikh (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 735 | Const. P. 352/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Mst. Aisha Gul (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 736 | Const. P. 393/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Abdul Shakoor Memon (Petitioner) VS Mst Samreen D/O Gul Muhammad Solangi (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-NOV-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 737 | Const. P. 1787/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2013 | Ghulam Ali & another (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-AUG-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 738 | Const. P. 1054/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Mst Sidra Bhatti (Petitioner) VS P O Sinbdh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 739 | Const. P. 385/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Abdul-ur-Rehman (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 740 | Const. P. 351/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Ahmed Ali Shaikh (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 741 | Const. P. 754/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Ali Muhammad & Ors (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 742 | Const. P. 1826/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Sarfraz Ali Bhutto (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 743 | Const. P. 3426/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2014 | Shamim Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Shoaib Ahmed and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-NOV-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.1468-K/2018 Sahmim Ahmed v. Shoaib Ahmed & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 744 | Const. P. 594/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Shahzaib Khokhar (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 745 | Civil Revision 132/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2011 | Allah Wassayo Samejo (Applicant) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 03-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 746 | Const. P. 1705/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Siraj Hussain (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 747 | Const. P. 5243/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Sundheer Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 748 | Const. P. 1358/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Ismail Ibrahim S/o Ibrahim Jamal (Petitioner) VS Kashif Muhammad Baig & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-AUG-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.80-K/2018 Kashif Muhammad Baig and others v. Ismail Ibrahim and others,C.P.1097-K/2018 Kashif Muhammad Baig and others v. Ismail Ibrahim and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed,Pending Leave Granted | ||
| 749 | 2021 CLC 1437 | Const. P. 5890/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Ashiq Hussain Chaudhary & Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 02-NOV-20 | Yes | If at all any alteration is inevitable or the open spaces that vests with the Cantonment Board now is required, the powers and jurisdictions vests with the Board with whose consultation the desired object could be materialized and not otherwise. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | C.P.1026/2021 The Officer In-Charge Army Housing Directorate, Karachi v. The Federation of Pakistan through the Secretary Ministry of Defense, Rawalpindi Cantt and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending |
| 750 | Const. P. 2902/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Mukhtiar Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 751 | Const. P. 1132/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Sagheer Ahmed Ansari & Ors (Petitioner) VS Yar Mohammad & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 19-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 752 | Const. P. 2171/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Ms.Sadaf Gul (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-NOV-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 753 | Const. P. 1764/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Suhbat Ali (Petitioner) VS Govt of Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 754 | Const. P. 3217/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Dr. Muhammad Osama Shafiq (Petitioner) VS PEMRA and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 26-AUG-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 755 | Const. P. 1796/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Waheed Brothers Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.400-K/2019 Muhammad Panah and others v. Province of Sindh thr. Secy: Local Govt. Deptt: and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | ||
| 756 | II.A. 115/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | M/s. Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Appellant) VS M/s. Interbras Petrobras Comerico & Another (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-MAY-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.493-K/2019 M/s Trading Corporation of Pakistan v. M/s Interbras Petrobras Comerico International S.A. Brazil thr. their attorney and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed Dismissed | ||
| 757 | Civil Revision 170/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2015 | Taj Muhammad (Applicant) VS Allah Din & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-MAR-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 758 | Const. P. 46/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Dr: Ahmed Bux (Petitioner) VS Sikandar Ali and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 07-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 759 | Const. P. 2012/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Abdul Faheem (Petitioner) VS P.O. Sindh & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 12-NOV-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 760 | Criminal Appeal 146/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Manzoor ALi (Appellant) VS The State (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 09-DEC-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 761 | Civil Revision 108/1999 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 1999 | Abdul Majid (Applicant) VS Dur Muhammad & ORs (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 10-FEB-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 762 | Const. P. 1099/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Muhammad Siddique An Others (Petitioner) VS Ali Ahmed And Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 763 | Const. P. 217/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Mst Najeeta &another (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-MAR-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 764 | Const. P. 155/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Tehreek e Labaik (Petitioner) VS D.C Hyd (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 765 | Const. P. 5703/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Amir Nawaz (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 22-JAN-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 766 | Conf.Case 14/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Fouji Imam Ali (Appellant) VS The State (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 02-DEC-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 767 | Const. P. 3636/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2016 | Abdullah Shah Ghazi sugar Mills (Petitioner) VS Province Of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-OCT-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 768 | Const. P. 7031/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Anwar Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 769 | Const. P. 5691/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | OOCLPakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 770 | Const. P. 1019/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Liberty Power Tech Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 771 | Const. P. 2586/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Dr. Mustafa Haidermota (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 772 | Const. P. 1648/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Abdul Rehman & Others (Petitioner) VS IIIrd A.D.J Karachi - South & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 773 | Const. P. 5611/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | The House Keeper (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 774 | Const. P. 5025/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Shams Abbas Hasan Bilgrami (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 775 | Const. P. 5430/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Equity Textile Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | ||||
| 776 | Const. P. 4444/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Aziz Tabba Foundation (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 777 | Const. P. 3262/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s M. Usman (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 778 | Const. P. 5325/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Popular Cement Ind Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 779 | Const. P. 4634/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Najam Mirza (Petitioner) VS Election Commission of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 780 | Const. P. 4853/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Marcus Evans Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 781 | Const. P. 3877/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Sai Enterprises (Petitioner) VS S.R.B and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 782 | Const. P. 6094/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Adam Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 783 | Const. P. 5462/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Habib Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 784 | Const. P. 4367/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | National Insurance Co. Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 785 | Const. P. 6166/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Pakistan Currency Exchange Co. Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 786 | Const. P. 5736/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Irfan Ghazi (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 787 | Const. P. 5930/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Popular Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 788 | Const. P. 5978/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Imran Crown Corks (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 789 | Const. P. 7355/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Kompass Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 790 | Const. P. 4750/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Alpha Insurance Co. Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 791 | Const. P. 6127/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Sixth Constructon (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 792 | Const. P. 4209/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Ahmed International (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 793 | Const. P. 4679/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Habib Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and OThers (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 794 | Const. P. 4578/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Dolmen City Rent (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 795 | Const. P. 5453/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Noor Muhammad (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 796 | Const. P. 154/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | TARIQ MASOOD (Petitioner) VS SHER MUHAMMAD DIN & OTHERS (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 09-APR-21 | Yes | The respondent may have proved the ownership of the property but then the relationship of landlord and tenant has to be established independently. It has to be proved through reliable evidence and documents that applicant/respondent apart from being owner of property was also the landlord of the occupant. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 797 | Const. P. 2365/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Goldway Hygiene Products (Petitioner) VS Collector of Customs and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 798 | Const. P. 7553/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Rask International (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 799 | Const. P. 3492/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Naresh Kumar (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 800 | Const. P. 1600/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Ahmed Trading Co. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 801 | Const. P. 1363/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s New United Chemical & Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 802 | Const. P. 5943/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Khurram Ali Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 803 | Const. P. 1074/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Mst. Parveen Ara (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Hanif & Another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 07-APR-21 | Yes | Evidence available does not fulfill the requirement of Section 15-A of the SRPO as it has to be proved independently that the premises was re-let. Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to prove its contention through evidence that it was a misuse of section 15 of the SRPO whereby the eviction of the petitioner was acquired through a mala fide attempt. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.580-K/2021 Mst.Parveen Ara v. Muhammad Hanif & others,C.A.47-K/2021 Mst.Parveen Ara v. Muhammad Hanif & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted,Pending Adjourned (Mr.Iftikhar Javed Qazi,ASC is appointed as Amicus) | |
| 804 | Const. P. 5052/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Allah Rakha Choudhry (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 805 | Const. P. 5237/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Heinz Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 806 | Const. P. 4454/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Sheikh Imran ul Haque (Petitioner) VS Addl: Commissioner I.R and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 807 | Const. P. 3848/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Zahid Shaikh (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 808 | 2018 PLC Lab. 232 | Const. P. 149/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | National Refinery Ltd (Petitioner) VS Mst.Farida Begum & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-17 | Yes | Once an application under order I rule 10 CPC was filed, respondent No.3/Commissioner assumes the jurisdiction to pass order under the law. Any order that transgresses its authority and jurisdiction is then to be tested on the touchstone of principle whether a substantial relief likely to be granted to the respondent No.1, has been impaired. Not only the petitioner was allegedly deleted but at an interim stage declaration has been made that petitioner is not the employer which is beyond the principle laid down in the case of Fauji Fertilizer Company Ltd. v. National Industrial Relations Commission reported in 2013 SCMR 1253. So if its authority and jurisdiction is to be analyzed on such touchstone it looks transgressed. By scoring off petitioner from the pleading it exercised jurisdiction not vested in him as in trial the determination was yet to be made. Scoring of petitioner from trial before trial is an act exercised with material irregularity. Presiding Officer held security company responsible and swap them and the intention was reflected in the order, (one comes in and other goes out). Besides this, such an option of reviewing the order was attempted to be exercised when an application under order IX rule 9 read with section 151 CPC was filed to set aside order dated 14.05.2011 which also met its conclusive dismissal on 05.01.2012 and the matter thereafter was fixed for framing of issues. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 809 | II.A. 70/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Muhammad Farooq (Appellant) VS Ranomal and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 08-APR-21 | Yes | I have reached to the conclusion that perhaps these power of attorney and sub-power of attorney are to be read with the sale agreement and sale consideration and the contents of the power of attorney which may be looked into in terms of Section 200 and 202 of the Contract Act and some view had to be formed whether it coupled with interest. In that case if the property was not enjoyed by Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited it was surely enjoyed by one of the Directors i.e. Allah Dino Behan and at one point of time the widow of Allah Dino Behan i.e. Mominat Behan, may be as chief executive of Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited, entered into agreement of sale, having share in it. The sale consideration for plot was paid by Allah Dino Behan. If at all for any technical reason the performance could not be sought against Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited, it could well be asked against an individual Allah Dino Behan and/or widow Mominat who acquired share in it when she entered into agreement. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 810 | Const. P. 4175/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s K.S Enterprise and Others (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 811 | Const. P. 790/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Zafar Ali Palejo (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 21-NOV-19 | Yes | in the absence of a challenge to the recommendation of DPC by any aggrieved person, we do not conceive it to be justified in withholding notification as to promotion of petitioner in pursuance of recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee. We, therefore, had allowed this petition vide short order dated 21.11.2019 on the strength of the recommendation of the Committee and subsequent approval by the Chairman. The respondents are thus directed to issue a notification in consequence of such recommendation | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | |||
| 812 | 2018 CLC 1357 | R.A (Civil Revision) 166/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Jacob (Applicant) VS English Biscuits Manufactures (Pvt) Ltd & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 12-FEB-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 813 | Const. P. 180/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Nadeem ur Rehman (Petitioner) VS Cantonment Board Faisal & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 814 | 2020 SBLR Sindh 1735 | Suit 1222/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Forte Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. (Plaintiff) VS Pakistan Petroleum Ltd. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 07-FEB-17 | Yes | -The contract in question contains specific terms in relation to any default of the plaintiff including but not limited to late delivery of the goods. It is also an admitted fact that on account of late deliveries of certain goods, in pursuance of such clauses relating to late deliveries the defendant No.1 had already deducted liquidated damages from the subject bills/invoice. Hence, once such late delivery charges have been recovered/deducted, the encashment of subject guarantee in relation to same issue is a debatable issue. It amounts to collecting liquidated damages twice over the same alleged default and can be termed as vexing the plaintiff twice which is also hit by Section 74 of the Contract Act. Therefore, any attempt to collect further amount on the basis of same default would tantamount to be in violation of Section 74 of the Contract Act which prima facie prohibits compensation/penalty in excess of any amount stipulated in the contract itself. --Insofar as second contention, which relates to complying with the terms and conditions of new obligations of the documents dated 09.10.2012 and performance guarantee dated 21.12.2010 is concerned, it only covers the obligation as contained in the purchase order dated 08.12.2010 and 13.12.2010 and any other subsequent amendment, novation, additional obligation, that may arise in relation to the project shall not be covered by the terms thereof. The ultimate paragraph of this performance guarantee is in support of above observation. Such recourse is deducible out of section 128 of the Contract Act, which allows the guarantee obligation to be limited by way of contract. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 815 | 2022 PTD 732, 2021 SBLR Sindh 2391 | Const. P. 5674/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Spectrum Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-SEP-21 | Yes | Sub-section 2 of Section 81 caters for a situation when the goods are allowed to be cleared or delivered on the basis of provisional determination, the amount of duty, taxes and charges correctly payable to those goods shall be determined within six months from the date of provisional determination. The time is further extendable provided the officer concerned may in the circumstances of exceptional nature and after recording such situation extends period of final determination, which shall in no case exceeds ninety days.2 Proviso to sub-section 2 provides the calculating mechanism of the period prescribed in subsection 2 of Section 81. Sub-section 3 of Section 81 provides the mechanism on completion of final determination. The amount already paid or guaranteed shall be adjusted against the amount payable on the basis of final determination and difference between the two amounts shall be paid forthwith to or by the importer as the case may be. --Indeed the ???Explanation??? in a statute/enactment does form an integral part to the extent of explaining and elaborating meaning of the word in the section3 and the purpose is to explain, clarify, add or subtract something by clarification 4, however, the word provisional assessment is neither used in sub-section 1 nor in sub-section 2. It is sub-section 1 which secured differential amount on provisional determination and not provisional assessment 5. If the interpretation of respondent is accepted then customs would never bother to determine it finally and would enjoy benefit of not doing anything after provisional release. We may observe that the respondent conceded that the cause of delay in final determination is not attributable to the importer. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.1606-K/2021 Federal of Pakistan & others v. M/s Spectrum Enterprises Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed |
| 816 | M.A. 16/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Sultan Ali (Appellant) VS Metro (Pvt.) Ltd. & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 817 | Suit 378/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | M/s. Emocon Engineering (Plaintiff) VS M/s. Exterran and another (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 25-JAN-16 | Yes | The nature and scope of Act XVII of 2011 is such that the discretion, as available in Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, is not available. A party to an arbitration agreement against whom legal proceedings have been brought and in respect of a matter which is covered by the arbitration agreement, may upon notice to the either party to the proceedings, apply to the Court in which the proceedings have been brought, to stay the proceedings insofar as the subject matter is concerned unless the arbitration agreement is claimed to be null and void or any part is incapable of being performed, which is not the case here as in terms of Para 27 of plaint the plaintiff himself seeks application of the subject agreement in letter and spirit, which includes the arbitration clause. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 818 | Const. P. 3101/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Mst Noor Bibi (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author) | C.P.891-K/2020 Mst.Noor Bibi v. Province of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed for Non-Prosecution | ||
| 819 | Const. P. 1169/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Nusratullah Khan S/o Farhatullah Khan (Petitioner) VS Shahid Aslam & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 30-OCT-17 | Yes | sale agreement does not reflect that he/petitioner was given possession in part performance of the agreement. The possession was to be handed over on payment of full sale consideration when he undertook to pay in installment. How then plea of handing over possession in part performance be accepted. The alleged payment towards initial sale consideration was also all in cash. He could have defended the application after complying the tentative rent order. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 820 | Const. P. 3730/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Mohsin Jameel & Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 821 | Const. P. 4832/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s K.P Services (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 822 | Suit 792/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | MRS.ATIYA SULTANA (Plaintiff) VS THE KESC E.C.S & ORS. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 09-OCT-15 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 823 | Cr.Bail 706/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | NASIR S/O ABDUL MANAN & ANOTHER (Applicant) VS THE STATE (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-MAY-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 824 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 194/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | M/s. Sabri Store, Lahore (Applicant) VS Director General Intelligence & Investigation-FBR (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 825 | Const. P. 2995/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s H & H Agro Ind (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 826 | Const. P. 4996/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Allah Rakha Choudhary (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan adn Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 827 | 2021 PLC (CS) 1304 | H.C.A 108/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Professor Dr. Lubna Ansari Baig (Appellant) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 14-JUL-21 | Yes | --we are only of the view that once an earlier injunctive order was passed, a follow up order to carry the real object of the earlier order should have been passed. Presumably, earlier order was passed after a tentative assessment of well-known principle of granting injunction. Learned Single Judge would have been empowered to revisit and decide the applications finally, based on three ingredients, referred above, but not in a cursory manner and that too after passing adverse remarks. --This selection of observation by the learned Single Judge has perhaps overlapped and overshadowed the earlier order and the mandate and without actually the applications being heard and decided. The cursory proceeding normally leads to miscarriage of justice and cumulative effect of the impugned order render it as confounded and in variance. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||
| 828 | 2017 PLD Sindh 520 | Suit 1145/2008 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2008 | M/S. BHANERO ENERGY LTD. (Plaintiff) VS SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-JUN-15 | Yes | The other aspect i.e. to be applied is the Principle is Estopple. The person or entity shall not be permitted to blow hot and cold with reference to transaction or insist for different treatment at different time. Since 1995 and more importantly since the Policy of 1994 and 2002 was introduced they have never considered themselves to be an IPP. It would be highly inequitable if an entity is allowed to repudiate a former instance or act to deny a constant approach of another entity or person who has been all along insisting on it constantly. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 829 | Const. P. 1345/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Dr. Muhammad Azhar Imam Thr. M. Afsar Imam (Petitioner) VS Mst. Nida Jamil and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-JAN-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 830 | Const. P. 1059/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Zaheer Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 02-OCT-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry | C.P.635-K/2019 Zaheer Ahmed v. Province of Sindh thr. Education & Literacy Govt. of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 831 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 133/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi; attached cases: Spl.Cus: Ref: Appln 132 of 2015 | 2015 | The Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Al-Naseeb Traders, Karachi. (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 06-SEP-21 | No | Once the assessment order is passed and clearance of the goods under Section 80 is made, the consignment then is out of charge and then such assessment is not liable to be intervened unless the recourse as available under law is invoked before a Collector Appeals for reopening of the assessment etc. In addition to this the amended section 38 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 and insertion of Section 230 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the customs officials including respondent No.1 cannot be deemed to have been appointed as officer of Inland Revenue. Thus the contravention so prepared is without jurisdiction and the authority. The Collectorate of Customs does not enjoy the authority of collecting sales tax and income tax of the regime under discussion, once the goods are out of charge | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.1642-K/2021 The Collector of Customs v. M/s. Al-Naseeb Traders Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | |
| 832 | Const. P. 4829/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s K.P Services (Petitioner) VS Fed/ of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 833 | 2020 SBLR Sindh 239 | Const. P. 569/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Shahzad Ali (Petitioner) VS Syed Abid Ali & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 14-NOV-17 | Yes | Hence the only presumption, deducible in absence of any contrary evidence is that it was executed and authenticated in presence of Notary Public who is one of the authority to authenticate the subject document i.e. Power of Attorney. -- | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 834 | Const. P. 6475/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Pharma Net (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 835 | Const. P. 6920/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Print Textiles Industries (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 836 | 2022 PTD 94 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 203/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s. Universal Enterprise (Applicant) VS The Customs Appellate Tribunal & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-OCT-21 | Yes | The amount of remittance may not be of any importance as the actual evidence is invoice which is relied upon. Hence the price actually paid could very conveniently be determined on the basis of such documents and notwithstanding the insertion / amendment made in the year 2017 as far as the second proviso to Section 25A is concerned, it is the amount, which is actually paid or payable which is considered as customs value for the goods when sold for export to Pakistan. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan(Author) | ||
| 837 | I.T.R.A 363/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (Applicant) VS M/S ARSHAD AMJAD & ABID (PVT) LIMITED (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 838 | Const. P. 6445/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Zeal Pak Cement Factory Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 839 | Const. P. 6599/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | M/s Lucky Cement (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and ORs (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.21/2022 Lucky Cement Limited, Karachi v. Federation of Pakistan through the Secretary Revenue Division, Chairman Federal Board of Revenue, Ministry of Finance and Revenue, Islamabad and another,C.A.318/2022 Lucky Cement Limited, Karachi v. Federation of Pakistan through the Secretary Revenue Division, Chairman Federal Board of Revenue, Ministry of Finance and Revenue, Islamabad and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted,Pending | ||
| 840 | Const. P. 2308/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | National Refinery Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.321-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. National Refinery Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 841 | 2022 PTD 539 | Const. P. 4292/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Outdoorsman (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 06-DEC-21 | Yes | We do not find any necessity of an independent license from the federal government in presence of Import Policy Order, 2016 w.e.f. 14.6.2018 followed by Import Policy Order, 2020. The Import Policy Order, 2016 in terms of the subject in hand was amended by virtue of SRO No.772(1)/2018 on 14.6.2018 which provides that the individual license holders or arms dealership license holders [as issued by Home Department, Province of Sindh] are allowed to import arms and ammunition. It was clarified by Federal Government, Ministry of Commerce & Textile vide letter dated 06.09.2019 that the import of arms and ammunition does not require any import authorization from the Commerce Division Islamabad after issuance of SRO No.772(I)/2018 dated 14-06-2018. For convenience and ready reference, text of [i]. Letter dated 06.09.2019, [ii]. Section 6(1) and [iii]. Entry No.62 Part I of Appendix B of IPO, 2020 ---Section 4 of ibid Act 2013 is related to the license for the manufacture/sale of arms and ammunition which is not the case here. Section 5 deals with the import, export and transportation which for all intent and purposes means import and export within the province of Sindh and we, while read it down, do not find it to be ultra vires to the Constitution. It primarily concerns with the person who is brining into and taking out of Sindh or any of its districts, arms, ammunition or military stores of a firearm or convert an imitation firearm into a firearm unless a license has been issued in accordance with the provisions and rules thereunder. Similarly, in section 9&10 the words import and export are in relation to brining into and taking out of the province of Sindh and any of its districts and it does not mean import of any arms and ammunition from outside the country which is an independent subject of the federal government hence, we read down these provisions to be within frame of Sindh Arms Act, 2013 and are not ultra vires the Constitution. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.245-K/2022 The Province of Sindh through Home Department Government of Sindh & others v. M/s. Outdoorsman & others,C.P.246-K/2022 Federal Board of Revenue & others v. M/s. Outdoorsman & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending ,Pending |
| 842 | Const. P. 6964/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Shah Murad Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 843 | Const. P. 7041/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Rizwan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 844 | Const. P. 7123/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Rubicon Builders & Developrs (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 845 | Const. P. 6974/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | SEPCO Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 846 | Const. P. 6789/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Gul Ahmed Holdings (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 847 | Const. P. 3300/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s EPlanet Communications (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS The Commissioner I.R (Appeals-III) and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 848 | Const. P. 6889/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Tahir Engineers & Contractors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 849 | Const. P. 5835/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Khawaja Anver Majid (Petitioner) VS F.B.R & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 850 | Const. P. 6554/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Sugrah Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Collector of Customs and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 851 | Const. P. 6794/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Noor Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 852 | Const. P. 2539/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s RAZ Textile (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 853 | Const. P. 2111/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s J.R Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 854 | Const. P. 6525/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Ahmed Fine Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 855 | Const. P. 7064/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Shah Transport Network (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 856 | Const. P. 773/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Salman Naeem (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 857 | Const. P. 975/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | Muhammad Iqbal & Ors (Petitioner) VS Azhar Abbas Butt & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 09-FEB-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 858 | Const. P. 6403/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mirpurkhas Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 859 | Const. P. 842/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Zoom Marketing Oil Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.5348/2021 Zoom Marketing Oils Pvt Limited Lahore v. The Province of Sindh through the Chief Secretary, Karachi and others,C.A.1617/2021 Zoom Marketing Oils Pvt Limited Lahore v. The Province of Sindh through the Chief Secretary, Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted. Interim Relied,Pending Summons Discharged (4 Weeks granted) | ||
| 860 | Const. P. 2469/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s PSO Co. Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.323-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. M/s. Pakistan State Oil Company Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 861 | Const. P. 2414/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Puma Energy Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.217-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Puma Engery Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 862 | 2022 PTD 984, 2022 SBLR Sindh 1536 | Const. P. 5791/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Zona Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 10-JAN-22 | Yes | There is no space of interpretation provided by petitioners in relation of Foreign Exchange Manual read with Section 154 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. Similarly, there is no applicability of extra territorial operation for giving effect to Article 141 of the Constitution. Hence we conclude accordingly. The doctrine of occupied field would also not come into play as we are of the view that Entry 49 of Federal Legislative List, as structured after 18th Amendment, empowers the province to legislate on the subject under consideration. The legislative powers defined under Articles141, 142 and 143 of the Constitution have not been violated while encompassing services rendered by indenters to be within the frame of SSTA 2011 and find its place within exclusion defined in Entry 49 of Federal Legislative List of Fourth Schedule of Constitution. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.917/2022 Zona Pakistan (Private) Limited Karachi v. Province of Sindh, through the Secretary, Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed Leave Granted, CMA Notice, Relist with connected appeals after vacations at Islamabad |
| 863 | Const. P. 4755/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Hamza Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 864 | Const. P. 6241/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s South Creek Mills Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 865 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 1233/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS Ms. Shazia Aman (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-DEC-21 | Yes | the Valuation Ruling such as one dated 10.07.2008 is not applicable as the valuation is to be issued on the basis of data of 90 days, either before or after, import in terms of Rule 107(A) of Customs Rules 2001. It has not been disclosed as to what the exact dates of the clearance of the goods are however subsequent valuation rulings, as reviewed, are of 15.07.2009 and 27.04.2010 respectively. In the absence of a clear date of clearance of the goods, the applicability of Valuation Ruling of 15.07.2009 and 27.04.2010 would be farfetched. Subsection 4 to Section 25A of Customs Act, 1969 was amended by Finance Act 2010 and assented on 30.06.2010 which was subsequent to the last ruling relied upon, hence by the time goods were cleared the regime of availability of 90% data, pre or post, was applicable as the applicability of last issued Valuation Ruling was introduced after 30.06.2010. Even the show-cause notice is silent as to the date of clearance of the goods. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | |||
| 866 | Const. P. 7225/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Sadruddin Gilani (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 867 | Const. P. 6519/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Shad & Co. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 868 | 2022 PTD 1444 | Const. P. 310/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Al Tariq Construction (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 09-DEC-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 869 | Const. P. 6294/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Naveena Steel Mills (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 870 | Const. P. 2411/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Puma Energy Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.214-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Puma Engery Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 871 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 38/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Director General Customs Valuation (Applicant) VS M/s. Indus Trading Co. & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 872 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 215/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Suleman Sons, Karachi (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 873 | Const. P. 2405/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Shakir Ali Bhaijee (Petitioner) VS The Commissioner I.R & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 874 | Const. P. 2099/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M.A.K Azmati (Petitioner) VS IIIrd ADJ Karachi South & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 05-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 875 | Const. P. 6557/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Saleem Ahmed (Petitioner) VS VIIth Sr. Civil Judge Karachi (Central) & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author) | ||||
| 876 | Suit 706/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Hassan Haroon (Plaintiff) VS Abdul Basit & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 14-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 877 | Const. P. 3827/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Syed Asif Hussain (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 878 | Const. P. 5130/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Muhammad Asif and Ors (Petitioner) VS SBCA and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 879 | Suit 108/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | MRS.AISHA JAZBI FARHAT (Plaintiff) VS IMRAN AHMED & OTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 21-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 880 | Const. P. 892/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Kashif Keerio (Petitioner) VS Dr. Khushbo & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-MAR-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 881 | Const. P. 4882/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Bilal (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-JUL-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 882 | Suit 1585/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | SKYHAWKS AVIATION SERVICES WORLDWIDE (PVT) LTD. (Plaintiff) VS PAKISTAN CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 01-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 883 | Const. P. 663/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Abrar Hussain Danish S/o Mukhtar Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Mst. Eram Maqbool and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 27-MAY-19 | No | In view of the examination-in-chief recorded by the trial Court on oath there was no substantial denial of the dowry articles and its value by the petitioner. The findings of the appellate Court as far as factual assertions are concerned have reached conclusion therefore, in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan such conclusion cannot be interfered under Article 199 of the Constitution and constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. No case for interference is made out. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 884 | Const. P. 321/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Khalid Ali Khan (Petitioner) VS Najam Ahmed & Orhers (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 885 | Const. P. 2691/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Greaves Air-Conditioning Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 886 | Const. P. 2614/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Filters Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 887 | Const. P. 3628/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Mrs. Rabia Tariq (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 888 | 2015 YLR 2436 | Suit 50/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Waterlink Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. (Plaintiff) VS Farrell Lines & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 02-JUN-15 | Yes | "Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908).-- ---O. XXXVIII, R. 5---Attachment before judgment---Transportation of goods from one country to another---Breach of obligation---Attachment of container-- Word ""intent""---Scope---Plaintiff had sought attachment of containers which were belonged to Shipping None of the containers sought to be attached could be deemed to be in Pakistan as ultimate destination of such goods was Afghanistan---Said goods were only available at Port in Pakistan for the purpose of clearance and transshipment i.e. for transit period only---Plaintiff had no claim with regard to the containers-,-- Detention charges must have been accrued for shipping line---Goods did not belong to the consigner rather same belonged to the consignee in Afghanistan-Goods were neither deemed to have arrived or existed in Pakistan nor it would belong to consignor for the purpose of attachment-- Plaintiff had no privity of contract with the consignee---Present suit had not been filed against the consignee of the attached goods but against contractor of the consignee against whom plaintiff had a claim of recovery---Neither containers nor the goods therein were liable to be attached for the purpose of claim of plaintiff---Goods were meant to be transshipped to Afghanistan which were in Pakistan only in transit---Goods were not removed with ""intention"" to frustrate the decree which might be passed-- Application for attachment of goods was dismissed in circumstances." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 889 | Const. P. 3743/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Shahid Mehmood (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 890 | Const. P. 3676/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Asad Trading (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 891 | Const. P. 1899/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Chevron Lubricants Holding Pte Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.724-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue, Legal v. M/s. Chevron Lubricants Holding (Pvt) Ltd. & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 892 | Cr.Bail 773/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | SADAQAT ALI KHAN S/O MAQSOD ALI (Applicant) VS THES STATE (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 04-MAY-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 893 | Const. P. 6340/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Sultan Mehmood (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 894 | II.A. 23/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Ms. Al Fiza Glass Tower (Appellant) VS Mst. Humera Mateen Mateen (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 23-JAN-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 895 | Const. P. 941/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Muhammad Ashraf and others (Petitioner) VS P.O. Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 896 | R.A (Civil Revision) 131/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2017 | Liaquat Hussain & Others (Applicant) VS Muhammad Rahim & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 897 | Const. P. 4566/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Akbar Ali (Petitioner) VS Director Land Management KDA & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 898 | Suit 1476/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Latif Farooqi (Plaintiff) VS Pakistan International Airline Corporation Limited (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 25-FEB-22 | Yes | In terms of the written understanding, the plaintiff`s insurance claim should have been forwarded to the Insurance Department with available record, immediately after 12.6.2017 however, they took about six months when the Manager Insurance and Terminal Benefit for payment of loss of license insurance was appraised of such fact of the plaintiff`s medical inability. The reference to insurance company was made through AGM claims on 27.6.2018 i.e. after more than a year of expiry of policy and plaintiff being declared unfit. The plaintiff was then informed that the insurance company rejected claim of the plaintiff as insurance policy was expired and his case was forwarded to relevant insurance company belatedly | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 899 | Const. P. 983/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Sajjad Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 900 | Const. P. 1173/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: C.P No.D-1174, 1175, 1176, 1177, 1179, 1180, 1181, 1182, 1183, 1184, 1185, 1186, 1187, 1188, 1190, 1191, 1192, 1193, 1194, 1195, 1197, 1200, 1203, 1204, 1205, 1224, 1225 & 1322 of 2022 | 2022 | Syed Muhammad Ovais (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-APR-22 | No | The point of laches has not been decided conclusively, those orders would not bind other Bench to follow similar view in view of the point under consideration. There is no such order of equal Bench , which has addressed on the issue of laches and then ordered for appearance before Redressal Committee. Since the question of laches was never discussed in detail in any of the cited orders of other bench, hence these petitions suffer from laches and same are accordingly dismissed alongwith listed application(s). | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | |||
| 901 | R.A (Civil Revision) 11/2004 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2004 | Military Estate Officer & others (Applicant) VS Karim Bux and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 01-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 902 | Const. P. 866/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Mst. Nazia (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 903 | R.A (Civil Revision) 237/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Muhammad Yousuf & Others (Applicant) VS Muhammad Usman & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 904 | Suit.B 51/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Sindh Bank Limited (Plaintiff) VS M/s Pak Ethanol (Pvt) Limited & others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 11-JAN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 905 | 2022 PTD 866, 2022 PTCL 253 | Const. P. 5107/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Atlas Honda Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 18-FEB-22 | Yes | Sectoral benchmark ratios are therefore figures for various business metrics that must be used by the Commissioner to determine taxable income for a taxpayer where a taxpayer has been lawfully selected for audit but is unable to provide the relevant information, sufficient explanation for the record. Sectoral benchmark ratio does not concern with sectoral audit selection. It only empowers the Commissioner on an event when a taxpayer has failed to furnish record or documents including books of accounts or has furnished incomplete record or books of accounts or is unable to provide sufficient explanation regarding defect in relation to the documents or books of accounts on the basis of an independent procedure of Section 177 of Ordinance 2001. It is at this stage when the guidelines of sectoral benchmark ratios, as prescribed by the Board, could be adhered to. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.680-K/2022 The Commissioner Inland Revenue, (Legal) v. Atlas Honda Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending |
| 906 | Suit 21/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Jamshed Lodhi (Plaintiff) VS Amir Hamayun (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 09-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 907 | Judicial Companies Misc. 2/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Industrias Cannon de Colombia S.A (Applicant) VS Olympia Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 15-AUG-16 | Yes | The claim of the petitioner itself is yet to be ascertained on the touchstone of Article 51 and Section 19 of the Limitation Act which summarily cannot be decided here. Even in the case of Halla Spinning Mills the observation of the Hon???ble Supreme Court was that efforts should be made by the judicial forums to adopt such device so that the project may continue running commercially and its financial liabilities starts reducing gradually. --The statutory notice of demand under clause (a) of subsection (1) of Section 306 of the Companies ordinance is in relation to a debt claimed by the petitioner which as observed is to be ascertained and is also subjected to a limitation clause and hence such statutory notice would also loses its strength when not only the claim is bonafidely disputed but is also subjected to the Limitation Act, which in this particular case appears to be a mixed question of law and facts. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 908 | Suit 329/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | HASCOL PETROLEUM LIMITED (Plaintiff) VS SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMM. PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 08-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 909 | 2012 SBLR Sindh 1407 | Cr.Bail 629/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Khaista Meer & Another (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 03-JUL-12 | Yes | "Pakistan Penal Code, 1860---Sections,. 34, 392 & 397-- Contradiction in statement???Further Inquiry " | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 910 | Suit 2025/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Rana Tahir Mahmood. (Plaintiff) VS M/s. English Biscuit. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 01-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 911 | R.A (Civil Revision) 55/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Abdul Jabbar Ggoto & another (Applicant) VS Rehmat Ali Arain & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 22-MAY-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 912 | R.A (Civil Revision) 78/2004 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2004 | Federation of Pakistan and others (Applicant) VS Devri Sahib of Satramdass of Raharki (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 29-MAY-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 913 | Suit 442/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | SALEEM (Plaintiff) VS MUHAMMAD SHUJAAT ALI SHAH (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 21-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 914 | Suit 206/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Mst. Fiza Bai & others (Plaintiff) VS Ghulam Ali & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 08-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 915 | Civil Revision 78/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Teekchand S/O Shewa Ram (Applicant) VS Ahmed Hussain & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-AUG-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 916 | 2015 YLR 2141 | Suit 128/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Bank Alfalah Ltd. (Plaintiff) VS Neu Multiplex & Entertainment Square Co. (Pvt) Ltd (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 14-JUL-14 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 917 | Const. P. 8011/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s S.M Chawla & Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 918 | Const. P. 4808/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Indus Motor Co. Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 919 | Const. P. 4814/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Muhamnad Aneees Iqbal Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 08-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author) | ||||
| 920 | Suit 683/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Mrs. Yasmeen (Plaintiff) VS Rovina Kaiser (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 15-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 921 | Const. P. 2203/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Sheraz Khan (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 922 | Const. P. 7129/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Choudhary Trading Co. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 923 | Cr.Bail 1001/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | ABDUL HAKEEM CHISHTI S/O MIAN GHULAM FAREED (Applicant) VS THE STATE (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 04-JUN-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 924 | Const. P. 223/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | YOUNUS MASIH (Petitioner) VS The Province Of Sindh & Other (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 24-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 925 | Const. P. 1950/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2015 | Muhammad Yahya & Anothers (Petitioner) VS Govt of Pakistan & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 14-OCT-20 | Yes | Service Matter | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | |||
| 926 | I. A 10/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Gul Muhammad Shar (Appellant) VS M/S Orix Leasing Pakistan Limited (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-AUG-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 927 | Const. P. 5120/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Pakistan Steel Mills (Petitioner) VS M/s Fakhra Jabeen and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-FEB-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author) | ||||
| 928 | M.A. 95/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Muhammad Sohail. (Appellant) VS Muhammad Shakeel & Ors. (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 01-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 929 | Const. P. 1109/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2017 | Salamat Ali (Petitioner) VS Learned 2nd Family Judge Badin & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 930 | Suit 2596/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | MST. SAMAN HASSAN & OTHERS (Plaintiff) VS MST. SHAMIM FATIMA & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 16-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 931 | Const. P. 1626/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Abdul Rehman (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 932 | Judicial Companies Misc. 3/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Ali Husain Rajabali Limited (Applicant) VS Security & Exchange Commissioner of Pakistan (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 28-JAN-22 | Yes | The company claimed to have been authorized under Article 6.4 of its Articles of Association to pass special resolution in this regard which it did subject to confirmation of this Court, as required under section 89 of Companies Act, 2017. The Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) was carried out on 30.01.2020 after issuance of notices dated January 8, 2020 and on the recommendation of the Board of Directors the resolution was passed on 08.01.2020. The Board unanimously through a special resolution passed on 30.06.2020 in terms of Section 89 of the Companies Act, 2017 resolved that the paid up share capital of the company be reduced in terms of the above. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 933 | R.A (Civil Revision) 84/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Noman Bashir Ansari S/o M Zahid Faheem (Applicant) VS Government of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 05-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 934 | Const. P. 4687/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Muhammad Ayoub Khan (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 935 | Const. P. 1976/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Liaquat Ali & Ors (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 936 | Const. P. 1599/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Asif S/o Rasheed Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Mst. Nasreen Bano & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 24-MAY-18 | Yes | as the case of personal requirement is concerned, there is nothing to challenge the personal bona fide need of the landlord. The defence that has now taken, at this stage, is that the premises are never owned by the respondent as it is the land of KMC and the respondent has no title. Even this defence as of now, is not available to the petitioner since the definition of landlord included the respondent who was receiving rent on the basis of rent agreement at the relevant time, which is named as ???Goodwill Agreement???. The only relationship that could said to be in existence in pursuance of such agreement is of a ???landlady??? and ???tenant???. In case the petitioner intends to challenge the title of the respondent, he could have handed-over the possession of the premises to the landlady first and then may challenge the title of the landlady if permissible under the law. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 937 | Suit -3416/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | MUHAMMAD ASLAM (Plaintiff) VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 17-JAN-22 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 938 | Suit 210/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Mst. Yasmeen Mirza & another. (Plaintiff) VS Batool Amir Ali & another. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 07-MAR-22 | Yes | The proposed compromise is absolutely contrary to the rights of minor. They should have disclosed all such facts in suit as well as in the application and it would be up to Court either to release share of the minor to Guardian Ad Litem or to retain it under a deposit scheme, with the Nazir of this Court. However entire plaint and these applications are silent in respect of share of the minor. I would take it as if minor is being deprived of her lawful share deliberately. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 939 | M.A. 4/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Mst. Reshman (Appellant) VS Mst. Naazi & another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 940 | 2013 MLD 584 | Suit 729/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | ABDUL WADOOD (Plaintiff) VS MUHAMMAD IQBAL & ORS. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 01-OCT-12 | Yes | (a) Malicious prosecution--- ----Suit for malicious prosecution, recovery of damages and compensation---F.I.R. was registered by defendants against the plaintiffs---Trial Court acquitted the plaintiffs in connection with the F.I.R. under S. 245(1), Cr.P.C on the basis that prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt---Plaintiffs instituted present suit with the contention that they had been maliciously prosecuted by the defendants by registration of an F.I.R.---Validity---Plaintiffs were acquitted by the Trial Court on account of the fact that prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt---Judgment of Trial Court was silent with regard to the "malice" of the defendants and also with regard to the "falsehood" of the F.I.R.---Plaintiffs had failed to establish that there was "no reasonable and probable cause" for their prosecution---Plaintiffs had also not proved claimed special or general damages----Simple affidavit in evidence had been filed by plaintiffs without support of any documentary evidence claiming professional fee, travelling charges, business loss, mental torture/discomfort, damages on account of loss of reputation and defamation in public---Suit for malicious prosecution was dismissed accordingly. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 941 | Const. P. 101/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Sharif (Petitioner) VS M.D K-Electric & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 942 | 2022 SBLR Sindh 1125 | Suit 2679/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | TUFAIL AHMED SHAIKH (Plaintiff) VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 17-JAN-22 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 943 | Const. P. 370/2014 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2014 | Mst Bibi Naz Bibi (Petitioner) VS Province Of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 18-JAN-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author) | ||||
| 944 | Const. P. 1585/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Shahnawaz Channar (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 945 | Const. P. 1539/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Rana Jaweed & Ors (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 946 | Const. P. 177/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Sardar Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-SEP-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain | ||||
| 947 | Const. P. 6615/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Karimi Corp (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 948 | I. A 61/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | Muhammad Anwar (Appellant) VS Haji Hamza Khan Jamali & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-JUN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Rashida Asad | ||||
| 949 | Execution 32/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Sultan Kath S/o Haji Suleman (Decree Holder) VS Feroza D/o Haji Kassim & Others (Judgment Debtor) | S.B. | Order | 16-NOV-22 | Yes | Nothing was adjudicated by the Court as to the entitlement of the parties and status of property; it was compromised out of Court which was reduced into writing and which was taken on record by this Court. Under the circumstances, Court???s umbrella should not have been used in matter of execution which disputes were not adjudicated by Court. Nothing commented about the title of the subject property by trial Court, which was/is being conveyed by one private party to another in terms of the compromise reached amicably without adjudication | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 950 | Const. P. 149/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Shrimati Shela (Petitioner) VS P.O. Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 951 | Judicial Companies Misc. 29/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Amir Bux Channa & Another through Attorney (Applicant) VS Isra Islamic Foundation (Guarantee) Limited. (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-JAN-23 | Yes | Perhaps the Act would define role of Chancellor and Vice Chancellor and before reaching to such conclusion I am of the view that all such affairs, as ordered as interim measure, referred above, shall continue and Nazir shall continue to disburse salaries of employees of Isra University accordingly in terms of list already available with him (Nazir) including payment towards utilities and/or any other lawful routine expenses likely to be incurred. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 952 | Suit 1354/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | MST. AFTAB FIZZA & OTHERS (Plaintiff) VS RAHEEL QAISER (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 03-NOV-22 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 953 | Const. P. 775/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matters | 2022 | Abdul Hameed & another (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 954 | Const. P. 97/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2018 | Sabir Hussain (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 955 | Const. P. 3289/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2018 | Manzoor Hussain (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 956 | Judicial Companies Misc. 45/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | ASSOCIATED CONSULTING ENGINEERS ACE LtD & 4 OTHERS (Applicant) VS NA (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 02-FEB-23 | Yes | The Scheme of Arrangement/Demerger Undertaking in view of understanding of the members/directors is to redesign and restructure the companies to promote the business avenues and apparently not against the public interest or violation of law. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 957 | Const. P. 549/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: Delimitation Connected Matters | 2022 | Aneel Kumar and others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 958 | Const. P. 1616/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Muhammad Sharif (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-MAY-22 | Yes | Since water quality plays significant role for aquatic life, we have enquired about tentative water quality assessment from officials who have not satisfactorily assisted. pH and TDS plays a significant role in determining the quality of water and its conduciveness for fish growth. It is very alarming if these tenders could be awarded without water assessment and thus would be a futile attempt for such purpose and may have a financial catch for some individual[s]. pH is a measurement of concentration of hydrogen ions in water. Lower pH means more hydrogen ions and higher PH means fewer hydrogen ions. pH has a scale from 1-14 which measures acidity and Alkalinity of water, anything above 7 in an alkaline based water whereas less than 7 is acidic. Similarly TDS is actually total dissolved solids in water which include both organic and inorganic substance. Research shows the effect of varying pH value differently on different commodity. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | |||
| 959 | Suit 1210/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | M/S. S.S.S. CORPORATION (Plaintiff) VS PROVINCE OF SINDH & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 19-SEP-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 960 | 2023 PLD Sindh 11 | H.C.A 210/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | Haji Ibrahim & Others (Appellant) VS Abdul Qadir Lakhani & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-JUL-22 | Yes | 1). Before granting a mandatory interlocutory injunction the Court had to feel a high degree of assurance that at the trial it would appear that the injunction had been rightly granted. 2).Similarly, a mandatory injunction ought not to be granted on an interlocutory application in the absence of special circumstances and then only in clear cases either where the court thought that the matter ought to be decided at once or where the injunction was directed at a simple and summary act which could be easily remedied or where the defendant had attempted to steal a march on the plaintiff. Moreover, before granting a mandatory interlocutory injunction the Court had to feel a high degree of assurance that at the trial it would appear that the injunction had been rightly granted. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Rashida Asad | ||
| 961 | J.M -188/2023 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2023 | Syed Mehfooz Ali Hashmi (Applicant) VS Khurshid ul Hannan & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 07-FEB-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 962 | Const. P. 720/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Saima Younis & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 963 | Const. P. 746/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Nazia (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 964 | Const. P. 710/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2016 | Nadir Hassan (Petitioner) VS Mukhtiakar R.Hyderbad and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 965 | 2023 CLD 125, 2023 SBLR Sindh 444 | Suit 1225/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | Pakistan Beverage limited (Plaintiff) VS State Bank of Pakistan & another (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 12-OCT-22 | Yes | No concluded terms of remittance via Letter of Credit were concluded prior to the cut-of date of 07.04.2022 and hence there is no retrospective applicability of Circular dated 07.04.2022 to the contract between supplier and plaintiff and such restrictions, as notified in the impugned circular, shall apply to the case in hand | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 966 | Const. P. 1673/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Shahfique Ahmed Arain (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 967 | Const. P. 1637/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Munwar Ali (Petitioner) VS Election Commission of Pakistand and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 968 | 2023 SBLR Sindh 366 | Suit 2707/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/S AGP LIMITED & ANOTHER (Plaintiff) VS M/S GALAXY PHARMA (PVT) LIMITED & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 15-SEP-22 | Yes | Undoubtedly and undisputedly the circumstances governed by an agreement no longer exists to enable defendant No.1 to continue using the registration. This drug was registered on the application of foreign principal in favor of defendant No.1 enabling it to manufacture, market and sell the products of the foreign principal. In view of severance of relationship between plaintiff No.2 and defendant No.1, as disclosed above the agreement came to an end. ---In the absence of any contract between foreign principal and defendant No.1 it would be a matter of serious concern if defendant No.1 would continue to manufacture, market and sell product of foreign principal without its permission and authorization. Plaintiffs thus have disclosed a prima facie case with balance of inconvenience and irreparable loss in their favour. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 969 | Const. P. 1681/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Umer Daraz (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | C.P.3669/2022 Messrs Raja Motor Car Company Limited thr. its Managing Director, Karachi v. Assistant Collector of Customs, Processing - II, Karachi Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed and Remanded to HC | ||
| 970 | Const. P. 3853/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | PTCL (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-JUN-22 | Yes | whether learned Member NIRC enjoy the jurisdiction to issue contempt notices | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 971 | Const. P. 1351/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: CP No. D- 1352 of 2022; CP No. D- 1353 of 2022; CP No. D- 1354 of 2022; CP No. D- 1355 of 2022; | 2022 | Novex Dry Cleaners Hyd (Petitioner) VS learned Sindh Labour Court Hyderbad & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-MAY-22 | Yes | Since the discretion was exercised by the Tribunal in condoning the delay within frame of SIRA Act 2013, we cannot replace our discretion with that of the Tribunal as this petition is neither statutory nor efficacious remedy. We are not sitting in appeal against order of appellate labour tribunal. The petitioners have already exhausted the remedy of appeal before Appellate Tribunal. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | |||
| 972 | Const. P. 1935/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Muhammad Aslam Khawar (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-JUN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 973 | Suit 672/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | M/S. MULTIX INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION (Plaintiff) VS KARACHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 19-OCT-22 | Yes | Word "Irrevocability" is not connected or articulated anywhere except Clause 1 i.e. for first 15 years only. There is no clause of investment after 15 years which may give continuity to irrevocability for any other period than described in the first clause and defendant has to hand over every structure, whether built by plaintiff or plaintiff occupied an already constructed area and that is it. Now at the end of this period the plea of investment cannot come into play since 15 years were consumed by plaintiff which is a huge period for recovery of such investment, if made, which in any case not the responsibility of defendant, as understood from plain reading of agreement. This has to be kept in mind while reading clause 38 that it is not a grant in perpetuity; only if parties to contract agree, it may be extended. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 974 | Judicial Companies Misc. 43/1988 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 1988 | M/s.National Lines (Pvt) Ltd. (Petititon (Applicant) VS .na (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 02-MAR-23 | No | Poor investors who invested their savings/hard earned money with the company in 1980s should get the amount proportionate to their investments. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 975 | Judicial Companies Misc. 16/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | Awwal Modaraba Managment Limited & 3 others (Applicant) VS NA (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 02-MAR-23 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 976 | H.C.A 57/2023 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2023 | Askari Bank Limited (Appellant) VS Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-MAR-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 977 | Const. P. 1369/2023 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2023 | Muhammad Raza (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-MAR-23 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 978 | Suit 694/2008 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2008 | Barrett Hodgson Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd. & another (Plaintiff) VS Pakistan Refinery Limited & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 01-DEC-14 | Yes | Rule 10 of Rule 1951 is an enabling provision for the concerned government. Such rule provides that either federal government or the provincial government, as the case may be, may by an order in respect of an area specified therein provide for securing that no building or building of such class, as may be specified in the order, shall be erected, extended or structurally altered except with the permission of that government as to lay out, material and construction. Thus, the words ???area specified??? does not and cannot be extended to restrain any adjacent land owner from raising construction in accordance with law. The word ???area specified??? in Rule 10 means the key-point such as 1-A etc. It is this area which is to be specified in the order to secure such area; either it may be point installation 1-A or 1-B, the concerned government may it be federal or provincial provide for securing such area that no building of such class as may be specified in the order referred above be erected without permission of that government unless that government gives permission with regard to its layout material and construction. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 979 | Suit.B 94/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | Royal Bank of Scotland (Plaintiff) VS Muhammad Nadeem (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 31-AUG-12 | Yes | It is neither shown nor indicated in any document as to how the damages and liquidation charges had been claimed and calculated and how they are reasonable which amount is otherwise contrary to the provisions of Contract Act, 1872. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 980 | Civil Revision 69/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2011 | Muhammad Sharif, thr:L.Rs: (Applicant) VS Abdul Razak, thr:L.Rs.and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 14-JAN-19 | Yes | The applicant claimed to be in possession of the subject property, however, he was unable to demonstrate as to how he came in possession. The agreement is absolutely silent as far as delivery of possession is concerned. His brother was a lessee of the land in question, however, the lease expired in the year 1997 and the possession of his brother is neither in pursuance of the sale agreement nor could he be deemed to be in possession as a lessee after the sad demise of his brother. His only defence was that he was given possession of the suit land in part performance of the agreement which has not come out of the evidence and the agreement. His own witnesses denied his version as there was no decision being taken as far as possession is concerned at the time of alleged agreement. In fact, the record and proceedings were called and original agreement was perused. It reflects a contrary view about possession which is to be delivered at the time of the registration of sale deed, hence, the evidence of the applicants is not confidence inspiring. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.175-K/2019 Muhammafd Sharif thr. his L.Rs & others v. Abdul Razak thr. his L.Rs & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | |
| 981 | Const. P. 963/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Sher Muhammad Mangi (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Dakhan namely Samander Khan and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 982 | Const. P. 1054/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Ghulam Sarwar Kanasiro and others (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Hyderi Larkana and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 983 | Const. P. 13/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Allah Noor and another (Petitioner) VS PO Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 984 | Const. P. 22/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Safia Brohi (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Bakrani and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 985 | Cr.Bail 309/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Abdul Haque Chawro (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | Yes | It appears that the entry allegedly referred pertains to the year 2003, whereas the FIR was lodged in the year 2012, thus there is inordinate delay of nine years. Although the entry pertains to the year 2003, however, it is yet to be ascertained as to whether such entry was on account of the fraudulent act of the applicant who was neither posted nor claimed to have been acted and for that how the applicant could be made responsible. All that has been pointed out is that the sale certificate on the basis of such entry was made, which per learned State Counsel was bogus entry and have bogus sale certificate. It is also yet to be determined as to whether this forged entry was inserted in the record of rights during his tenure or prior to him. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 986 | Const. P. 105/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Fozia Parveen Siyal (Petitioner) VS The SHO PS B Section Shahdadkot and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 987 | Const. P. 905/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Fateh Muhammad Solangi (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Kashmore and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 11-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 988 | Const. P. 73/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst: Bilqees & Others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | ||||
| 989 | Cr.Bail 295/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Imran Bhatti (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-13 | Yes | here is a considerable delay in lodging the F.I.R i.e., 3 days despite the fact that victim's brother went to police station to obtain the letter. In addition, perusal of the F.I.R shows that there is hardly any role prescribed to the applicant and entire accusation was made for Bashir Bhatti who caused straight fire from his Kalashnikov which hit the deceased on his back and went through. However, nothing was attributed to the applicant and no role was assigned to him. As far as the case of vicarious liability is concerned, no doubt Section 460, P.P.C is quite different and distinct from Section 302, P.P.C, however, it is yet to be determined that the applicant was involved as it has become a case of further enquiry on account of delay in lodging the F.I.R. These views are also fortified by one of the judgments referred above i.e., case of Faraz Akram, in terms whereof it was observed that the vicarious liability could be determined at the trial and not at this stage, where there is inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 990 | Cr.Misc. 105/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Qadir Bux Brohi (Applicant) VS The State and an other (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 29-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 991 | Cr.Appeal 55/2006 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2006 | Muhammad Rafique Malanhas (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah | ||||
| 992 | Cr.Bail 443/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Bashir Muhammadani (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | Yes | It is matter of fact that the present applicant Bashir Muhammadani though has been named in the FIR but no specific role is alleged against him. Neither the offence such as of instigation or prompting the main accused Bugho was attributed to the applicant. The role of other main accused is totally different from the role of the present applicant. Consequently, I admit the applicant on bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.250,000/- (Rupees two hundred fifty thousands only) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 993 | Cr.Rev 57/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Paltoo Khan Rajput (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-JAN-13 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 994 | Const. P. 991/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Sanjesh Kumar Panjwani (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Gaheja and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 995 | Cr.Bail 46/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Ali Murad Khaskheli (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | ||||
| 996 | Const. P. 47/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Arbab Khatoon another (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Rehmatpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 08-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 997 | Const. P. 1010/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Shoukat Ali Zardari (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 11-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 998 | Cr.Bail 413/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Ghulam Qadir Umrani (Appellant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 11-JAN-13 | Yes | It appears that the present application is only confined to the crime under Section 9(c) of C.N.S. Act. I have very minutely and carefully perused the record and the alleged recovery of 1900 grams Charas and it is noted that no private mashirs were associated. It is also inconceivable to learn that on spy information the applicant was found roaming around the place of incident alongwith weapon and charas. It is clearly a case of further enquiry. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 999 | Const. P. 31/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Mst Rani Panhwar (Petitioner) VS The SHO PS KN Shah and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 01-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1000 | 2014 SBLR Sindh 416 | Const. P. 2205/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Abdul Razzak (Petitioner) VS Election Commissiner of pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 28-MAY-13 | Yes | Jamate-Islami, under whose banner the petitioner has participated and contested the election, has boycotted the election and such fact via speech was covered by electronic media when the leaders of the said political party expressed their views. In the light of such boycott as the petitioner was contesting as a candidate for Jamat-e-Islami he cannot said to be an aggrieved person. | Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 1001 | Const. P. 36/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Allah Jurio Lashari (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Warah and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 13-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1002 | Const. P. 729/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2010 | Imtiaz Ali Sand (Petitioner) VS Yousif Jamali and ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 04-FEB-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1003 | Cr.Acq.A. 128/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Manzoor Ahmed (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1004 | Cr.Bail 292/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Imdad Ali Shar and others (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | Yes | It appears that in the FIR categorical allegations were raised against the two applicants. It was categorically mentioned in the FIR that they were brought in the police mobile at Police Station Dakhan where cash was taken from them. It was further mentioned in the FIR that on cries of Shabir Malangi he was beaten by the SHO Imdad Shar. Despite asking for mercy the applicants did not allow them to go they were beaten mercilessly ultimately, in the morning both the applicants left the Police Station by abusing that they have taught lesson for extending threats. They also did not return the amount that was taken by the applicants. It is alleged that they went to DSP as well as to Police Station New Fojdari for appropriate action however, all in vain and ultimately FIR was registered under the orders of the District & Sessions Judge, Shikarpur. The document which is a root cause in deciding the instant bail application is a final medicolegal certificate issued on 23.4.2012 in terms whereof Alif Khan son of Ali Bux Khrose the complainant, shown that in terms of X-Ray of left foot, fractures were seen in first and second metatarsal bones with soft tissue swelling and dislocation of calcanium. The injury No.1 opined by the doctor is Jurh Ghayr Jaifah Hashima caused by hard blunt substance (history of violence) . | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1005 | Cr.Misc. 210/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Akhtiar Shaikh (Applicant) VS SHO.P.S.Ghouspur & an other (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1006 | Cr.Tran 11/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | The State (Applicant) VS Sain Bux Nindwani (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1007 | Civil Revision 73/2005 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2005 | Agha Abdul Ghafoor and others (Appellant) VS Lal Chand and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1008 | Const. P. 144/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Nooral Luhar (Petitioner) VS Ali Anwar Brohi SHO PS Store Ganj & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1009 | Suit 1344/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | Amin Jan Mohammad (Plaintiff) VS Innovative Investment Bank Ltd. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 20-NOV-13 | Yes | the changes so made are not proved to be structural as the averments of the plaintiff???s witnesses are neither corroborated nor supported by any cogent material except that of verbal assertion. So also the plaintiff has failed to bring on record and/or exhibited any receipts to show payment as maintenance charges to the Association. It is a settled practice that whenever maintenance is paid receipts are being issued towards the same and in the absence of such receipts it cannot be established that the plaintiff has paid the maintenance charges and that too at the rate claimed. Since I have observed that the plaintiff has failed to prove any structural changes in the premises, the question of damages or cost towards restoring the premises back to its original position does not arise and the plaintiff is not entitled to claim such relief. As regards the claim of notice amount i.e. 12 months??? rent is concerned, the defendant in his letter dated 09.05.2008 (Ex.PS-1/9) asserted that since the premises was vacated by the defendant on special circumstances, therefore it was not binding on them to give notice of 12 months. This is an admission on the part of the defendant that they have not given 12 months??? notice. As regards the claim of the defendant as to the special circumstances, such thing is nowhere in the agreement which may absolve the defendant to perform his part of the agreement. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1010 | Cr.Bail 62/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Riaz u Rehman Memon (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1011 | Const. P. 323/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Ahmed Ali Shaikh (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Darri Larkana and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1012 | Cr.Bail 83/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2013 | Sarfraz Bughio (Applicant) VS The state (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 20-MAR-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1013 | Const. P. 2841/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Mst. Shama Lashari (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Thariri Muhabbat and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 18-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1014 | Const. P. 895/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2012 | Allahdad Abro (Petitioner) VS SHO PS Sharif Kharos District Shikarpur and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 11-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1015 | Const. P. 2249/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana | 2011 | Bilawal Pahore (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-JAN-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1016 | Cr.Bail 546/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Muhammad Usman (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 02-JUL-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1017 | Cr.Bail 612/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Muhammad Aslam (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 02-JUL-13 | Yes | The contents under Section 489-F for the perusal as reproduced as also the contents of the FIR clearly manifest the dishonesty. For reaching the conclusion as to whether offence under Section 489-F is bail out or not the applicant???s attitude towards the cheques need not to be further established as he has failed to inform the concerned Manager of the Bank regarding the alleged misappropriation of cheque which was allegedly stolen. The applicant has not been able to this fact satisfactorily as to why this information was not given to the Manager. It also creates an impression that before issuing cheque to the complainant he might have managed to lodge this non-cognizance report to save his skin from future dispute. With these reasons I am clear in my mind that the applicant is not entitled for concession of bail and this bail application is dismissed. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1018 | 2016 MLD 1527 | Const. P. 2547/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2015 | Khalid Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Deen Muhammad & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 29-DEC-15 | Yes | Sindh Local Government Act (XLII of 2013)--- ----Ss. 23 & 36---Sindh Local Councils (Election) Rules, 2013, R.18---Election for the seat of local council---Non-disclosure of complete assets at the time of submitting nomination papers---Effect---Rejection of nomination papers---Scope---Proper and Seconder were required to be from the constituency of candidate Nomination papers of the candidate were rejected on the ground that he had not disclosed his complete assets at the time of submitting the same---Appeal filed by the candidate was accepted and it was held that a person could not be disqualified for not disclosing the assets---Contention of rival candidate was that false statement had been given disclosing incomplete assets---Validity---Provisions of Sindh Local Government Act, 2013 and Sindh Local Councils (Election) Rules, 2013 did not provide any necessity or mandatory requirement to submit the details of assets at the time of submitting nomination papers---Successful candidate had to submit the details of assets within a period of 30 days when he took oath of an office---Candidate could not be disqualified on summary assumption for such details of assets---No one should be penalized for not disclosing the assets when law did not require him to disclose the same---No reason was available with the Returning Officer to reject the nomination form on account of not disclosing the assets---Statement made by the candidate did not fulfill the requirements for considering it to be an affidavit on oath---Even such information could not be considered to be a false affidavit---Nothing had been gained by the candidate by not showing assets at the time of filing nomination papers---Such information could not be considered to be a mala fide---Candidate's proposer and seconder were required to be from the same ward or constituency from where a candidate was contesting the election---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.603-K/2015 Khalid Ahmed Memon v. Deen Muhammad Talpur and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed |
| 1019 | Suit 815/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | MUHAMMAD SHAHNAWAZ & OTHERS (Plaintiff) VS K.E.S.C & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 25-APR-16 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1020 | Suit 1980/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Engro Fertilizers Ltd. (Plaintiff) VS Pak. Standards & Quality Control Authority & Ors. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 09-MAY-16 | Yes | Before parting I may observe that at an interlocutory stage this being not a petition or an appeal but an interlocutory application a detail discussion of the factual aspects of the matter and the Pakistan Standard & Quality Control Authority Act (Act VI of 1996) itself may prejudice case of the either parties. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1021 | Const. P. 6445/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Al Huda Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1022 | Const. P. 2839/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Azeem (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and otehrs (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-JAN-21 | Yes | recruitment process of Head Master/Head Mistress in BPS-17 and their participation in SPSC. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | |||
| 1023 | Const. P. 1123/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Shaikh Sultan Ahmed S/o Abdul Khalique (Petitioner) VS Iftikharuddin Paracha & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-APR-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.706-K/2018 Sh. Sultan Ahmed v. Itfikharuddin Paracha and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed for Non-Prosecution as well as on merit. | ||
| 1024 | Const. P. 1679/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Mrs. Tahmina Amir Khumbati & Another (Petitioner) VS Akbar Ali & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 28-MAY-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.875-K/2018 Mrs: Tehmina Amir Khambati and another v. Akbar Ali (decd) thr. his L.Rs and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 1025 | Const. P. 527/2004 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2004 | Joseph Masih through L.Rs. (Petitioner) VS 2nd A.D.J. Karachi South and ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-AUG-13 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.623-K/2013 Josef (decd) through his L.R's v. 2nd Additional District Judge Karachi South and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 1026 | Const. P. 1429/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Shahnawaz Dehraj (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-APR-19 | Yes | In defence, all that has been argued was that his father was only a covering candidate and has not secured even a single vote as the candidature was withdrawn. This is no reason to defend above misconduct and misuse of authority that since he was only a covering candidate and has not secured even a single vote, therefore, a sympathetic view should be taken against him. Success of a candidate to whom the incumbent Chairman was supporting is not a condition precedent as far as violation or misuse of office or authority is concerned. It is the active participation, influence and publicity which activated the authority concerned to remind him of his duty which ultimately ended up as a notification, whereby the petitioner was rescinded. There was no material in defence available nor even pleaded. He admitted his presence at the time of submitting nomination papers. He admitted his presence at some of the occasions where the candidate delivered speeches in a corner meeting and also his photographs in huge panaflex, signboards, hoardings, etc. and the only reason of his availability and pictures, panaflex, hoardings and publicity boards was to influence public at large and misuse of his office. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput | |||
| 1027 | 2016 CLD 1938 | Suit 516/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Jubilee Life Insurance Co (Plaintiff) VS The United Insurance Co (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 06-MAY-15 | Yes | Section 39 of the Trademark Ordinance, 2001 relates to the rights conferred by registration whereas Section 40 of the Ordinance deals with the infringement of the registered trademark. In terms of Section 40 subsection 3(c) of the Ordinance a person shall infringe a registered trademark if the person uses in the course of a trade a mark which is identical with, or deceptively similar to, the trademark in relation to services of the same description as that of service in respect of which a trademark is registered. The proposition thus appears to be simple that service which is being dealt with by both the plaintiff and the defendant whether is of same description or otherwise to attract the provisions as referred above. I may refer to the international classification of goods and services and it seems that it is being dealt with by class-36 and there is no dispute in this regard as the defendant himself chooses to apply under the same class. The defence that they have been dealing with takaful business would not turn much as it is being dealt with by the same classification | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 1028 | Suit 223/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | Arif Habib Equity (Pvt.) Limited & others (Plaintiff) VS Army Welfare Trust (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 02-DEC-16 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1029 | Civil Revision 47/2007 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2007 | Khan Muhammad (Appellant) VS Area Manager Sui Southern Gas Co and other (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-NOV-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1030 | Suit 114-B/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Al-Baraka Bank (Pakistan) Limited (Plaintiff) VS Enshaa Holdings Ltd. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 24-JAN-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | ||||
| 1031 | 2017 CLC Note 157 | J.M 12/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Karachi Development Company (Applicant) VS IM Technologies Pakistan & another (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 15-MAR-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1032 | Adm. Suit 2/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | M/s Megafeeder (Pvt.) Limited (Plaintiff) VS M.V. H & H Tide & another (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 19-DEC-16 | Yes | For exercising admiralty jurisdiction the case is to be made out in terms of Section 3 of Ordinance 1980 and prima facie no claim appears to have been made out as against defendant No.1 under admiralty jurisdiction. The question now arises is whether defendant No.2 who was prepared to deposit US $.300,000/- with the Nazir of this Court was in lieu of the claim against defendant No1 or defendant No.2 stood surety for itself as well. The order referred above is clear in this regard. The defendant No.2 deposited the subject amount against arrested vessel and it is not a surety against defendant No.2 otherwise this amount could have been withhold. The amount that was deposited thus could only be considered as a surety for defendant No.1 vessel for which prima facie the case has not been made out. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1033 | 2019 CLC 657 | Const. P. 704/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | ANTHONY D SILVA (Petitioner) VS SAFRAZ ALI (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 04-DEC-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.40-K/2018 Anthony D'Silva v. Sarfraz Ali and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed as Infructuous | |
| 1034 | Const. P. 1992/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Mujeeb ur Rehman and others (Petitioner) VS S.M Javaid Ahmed and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 19-OCT-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.602-K/2017 Mujeeb-ur-Rehman and others v. S.M. Javaid Ahmed and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed - 3 Months time allowed. | ||
| 1035 | Const. P. 2084/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Imran S/o Abdul Sattar (Petitioner) VS Court of IVth Rent Controller Khi South & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 17-APR-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.627-K/2018 Karachi High School owned & operated by the Civil Lines Educational Society thr. Director and another v. Muhammad Imran Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | ||
| 1036 | R.A (Civil Revision) 180/2006 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2006 | Province of Sindh & Ors (Applicant) VS Syed Murad Ali Shah (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 29-JAN-18 | Yes | Appellant may have lost the remedy of appeal but not their rights as to the entitlement over the subject land, as they claimed, and they may pursue actions and/or approach revenue forum to get the title clear, in case it is so desired, which may be considered and decided in accordance with law and the exparte finding may not come in the way of such judicial proceedings which shall be in accordance with law. This is a case where the provincial government shall also initiate proceedings against the ???officials??? who were responsible for not contesting the case on merit or who may be in collusion with the respondents and shall submit report to this Court within three months. State???s interest and/or the revenue interest is to be jealously guarded and more importantly when some officials appeared to have acted negligently and carelessly. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.585-K/2018 Syed Murad Ali Shah v. Province of Sindh and others,C.A.137-K/2019 Syed Murad Ali Shah v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Converted into Appeal and Allowed,Pending | |
| 1037 | Const. P. 1974/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Nadeem Ahmed Jatt (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1038 | Const. P. 593/2010 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2010 | Christion construction the Mega Structure (Petitioner) VS DCO Admin Sukkur and ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 1039 | II.A. 30/2007 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2007 | Mrs. Naseem Akhtar (Appellant) VS Mst. Rehana Nihal & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 11-DEC-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui | C.A.1-K/2018 Mrs. Naseem Akhtar v. Mst: Rehana Nihal and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | ||
| 1040 | E.P 9/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Ismail Shah Rashdi (Petitioner) VS Naeem Ahmed Kharal & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | Yes | The requirement of the nomination form is the disclosure of candidate???s assets and liabilities and that of dependents. The returned candidate did disclose the liabilities on him or his dependents as Rs.88,53,710/-, however, the heads of these liabilities are not available nor was it questioned by petitioner???s counsel. Though he is only required to disclose his assets and liabilities, he was not required to disclose the liabilities of independent children or of his elder brother, who is now deceased, and has a family, which in no way, was/is dependent on him. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1041 | Civil Revision 35/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Jam Muneer Ahmed Khan (decd),thr:L.Rs: & Ors (Applicant) VS Ahmed Din Rajri and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 08-FEB-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1042 | Const. P. 2377/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Muhammmad Ayub Khan (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 1043 | Const. P. 1949/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Khadim Hussain bhand (Petitioner) VS Deputy Commissioner Sukkur & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 1044 | Const. P. 2414/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2015 | Ayaz Hussain and others (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-JAN-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 1045 | E.P 21/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Irfan Ahmed Khan Jatoi (Petitioner) VS Abid Hussain Bhayo & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-FEB-19 | Yes | I would take into consideration is the service to be effected upon respondents before or at the time of presenting the petition. This petition was sent through courier on 19.09.2018 at 09:54 p.m. The receipts are available in the miscellaneous file, which is a part of the main file. The courier was sent to this Tribunal and all other contesting respondents including the returned candidate. No doubt, in Section 143(3) of the Elections Act, 2017, the intention of the legislature is clear as it talks about petitioner to serve a copy of the petition along with annexures to the respondents, however, the record reveals that it was sent to the Tribunal as well as to the contesting respondents at the same time. It was received by the Tribunal at 12:00 noon on 22.09.2018. The agent / TCS courier may have consumed time in preparing different receipts and for that reason, different time is disclosed in the receipts but for all intent and purposes, it was done at the same time. The Tribunal was shown to have delivered this petition, as stated above, on 22.09.2018 at 12:00 noon, whereas, other for other consignees, the date and time of delivery is not disclosed. Although, the presumption is only attached to the registered post in terms of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, but in view of the above facts and circumstances, it would amount to stretching it too far in case it is presumed that the notices of the petition were not delivered or served presumably at the same time when this Tribunal received the memo of petition along with annexures. It may also be noted that 20th and 21st of September were declared as public holidays being 9th and 10th of Moharram-ul-Haram. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1046 | 2020 CLC 92 | E.P 7/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Muzaffar Ali Brohi (Petitioner) VS Meer Nadir Ali Magsi & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 15-JAN-19 | Yes | The question now which remains for resolution is whether the omission on part of the Oath Commissioner in mentioning, in the attestation of verification or the affidavit, if the oath had been administered to the appellant/deponent, shall have the effect of invalidating the election petition. As regards the above, suffice it to say that according to the provisions of Article 129, illustration (e) of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, there is presumption of correctness attached to an official act and it could not be controverted by the learned counsel for the respondent that the oath commissioner who is appointed by the respective High Courts under the law shall be performing the official acts for which he was appointed. However, he has stressed that the administration of oath before attestation by the Oath Commissioner should not be presumed in this case rather should reflect from the contents of attestation. We have applied our mind to this aspect of the matter and hold that in order to meet the real object and the spirit of the election laws which require verification on oath, in an ideal situation, the Oath Commissioner at the time of verification of the petition etc. and also the affidavit, must record and endorse verification/attestation that the oath has been actually, physically and duly administered to the election petitioner/deponent. But as the law has not been very clear till now, we should resort to the principle of presumption stipulated by Article 129(e) ibid in this case for avoiding the knock out of the petition for an omission and lapse on part of the Oath Commissioner. But for the future we hold that where the election petition or the affidavit is sought to be attested by the Oath Commissioner, the election petitioner shall insist and shall ensure that the requisite endorsement about the administration of oath is made, otherwise the election petition/affidavit shall not be considered to have been attested on oath and thus the election petition shall be liable to be, inter alia, dismissed on the above score. We consciously and deliberately neither apply this rule to the instant case nor any other matter pending at any forum (election tribunal or in appeals). | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 1047 | Suit 2/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Ali Mushtaq & Others. (Plaintiff) VS Federation of Pakistan & Others.. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 19-JAN-23 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1048 | Const. P. 1941/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Baqir Ali Malik (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1049 | Const. P. 964/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Amjad Hussain Gajani (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1050 | Const. P. 203/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Sadam Hussain (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1051 | Const. P. 458/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Muzafar Ali Seelro (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1052 | Const. P. 2614/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Gulzar Ali (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1053 | Const. P. 1302/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Nand Lal Hindu (Petitioner) VS Askari Bank Ltd. Sarafa Bazar Sukkur & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-AUG-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1054 | Const. P. 2303/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Abdul Fatah (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1055 | Const. P. 1504/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Qasim Ali Mahar (Petitioner) VS Govt; Of Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1056 | Const. P. 1062/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Muhammad Khan Rind (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1057 | Const. P. 1019/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Muhammad Saleem Leghari (Petitioner) VS P O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1058 | Const. P. 162/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Hussain Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | C.P.1060-K/2020 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Khalid S Tirmizy Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Disposed Dismissed | ||
| 1059 | Const. P. 508/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Mumtaz Ali Lashari (Petitioner) VS Aditional District Judge Hudood & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 03-DEC-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1060 | E.P 3/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Saifullah Abro (Petitioner) VS Election Commission of Pakistan & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-NOV-18 | Yes | ection 55(3) of the RoPA, 1976 to the extent of verification and signing of the schedule or annexure is peri materia to Section 144(4) of the Elections Act, 2017, however, this relevant provision is to be adjudged and tested along with the rules framed under the Elections Act, 2017. Previously, there were no such rules except (Conduct of Election) Rules, 1977 which catered the process of election (pre-election process). Rule 140 offers that every petition shall be processed by the Tribunal and in case the petition is found deficient of laid down procedure, the petitioner shall be informed accordingly, indicating the deficiency/ies in the petition, directing him to fulfill the same within seven (07) days of the receipt of communication from the Tribunal, failing which the petition is liable to be ???dismissed??? by the Tribunal. The moot question thus is whether Rule 140 has any application to Sections 142, 143 and 144 of the Elections Act, 2017. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1061 | Const. P. 1659/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2014 | Dishad Ali Mughal (Petitioner) VS Mst. Rozina & another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1062 | Const. P. 738/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2013 | Ghulam Rasool (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-NOV-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 1063 | Const. P. 2154/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Wajid Khan Mahar (Petitioner) VS Mst Salma & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-AUG-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1064 | 2019 SBLR Sindh 896 | II.A. 54/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | Zafar Aziz Osmani (Appellant) VS Lt. Col.(R) M. Yousuf Satti & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 03-SEP-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.4212/2018 Muhammad Gulistan Khan v. Zafar Aziz Osmani & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | |
| 1065 | Const. P. 2879/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2012 | Naveed Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1066 | Const. P. 5394/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Riaz Hussain Chahchar (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1067 | Const. P. 5009/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Nadeem Ahmed Sandilo (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1068 | Civil Revision 22/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Masjid Madina (Applicant) VS Muhammad Rafique (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 03-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1069 | Const. P. 5199/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2016 | Waheed Ali Lakho (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1070 | Const. P. 708/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2017 | Inayatullah (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1071 | Const. P. 404/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Abdul Aziz Memon (Petitioner) VS Additional District Judge -11, Sukur & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1072 | Const. P. 146/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Abid Hussain (Petitioner) VS Secretary Health & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1073 | Const. P. 1112/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Swami Narayan Temple Trust Karachi (Petitioner) VS Mst. Paroo & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 04-JUN-18 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.884-K/2018 Mst: Paro v. Swami Narayan Temple Trust Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed | ||
| 1074 | Const. P. 1248/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Abid Ali Bhatti (Petitioner) VS Chief Secretary govt of sindh secretary khi & ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-SEP-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1075 | II.A. 46/2006 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2006 | Muhammad Aqil (Appellant) VS Muhammad Amir & Another (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 31-MAY-18 | Yes | The newly developed question in these proceedings while the instant appeal was pending adjudication is the alienation of the property by respondents No.1 and 2 to respondent No.3. It is claimed to have changed hands and respondent No.3 claimed to have acquired rights in the property and very ably represented by the same counsel who represents the respondents No.1 and 2. Its alienation was effected while the interim order was operating. Additionally Mr. Abrar argued issue of lis pendens. Admittedly the notice under section 18 of the Registration Act in terms of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act was not issued. The question of lis pendens would take its effect when proceedings would be initiated in terms of section 18 of the Registration Act, 1908 for its effectiveness and cure as required in terms of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.975/2018 Syed Muhammad Sami-ud-Din v. Muhammad Aqil & others,C.A.976/2018 Muhammad Amir & another v. Muhammad Aqil & another,C.A.32-K/2018 Muhammad Aqil v. Muhammad Amir and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending ,Pending ,Pending | |
| 1076 | Const. P. 1734/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Shahryar Ahmed Memon (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-OCT-18 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro | ||||
| 1077 | 2020 PLC (CS) 895 | Const. P. 141/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Usman (Petitioner) VS PTCL and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 19-DEC-19 | Yes | Subsection 2 of Section 36 of Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-Organization) Act, 1996 enabled an employer, with the consent of the transferred employee, to award appropriate compensation in lieu of whatever benefits they could have gained at the end of their tenure. These employees were given service benefits, which were not even matured at the time the employees opted VSS, hence it cannot be said that any guarantee or secured right was arbitrarily snatched by the employer. These employees could have continued to serve without opting VSS. VSS is a binding contract and nothing about its unconstitutionality was established nor is there any substance to render it as void under the Contract Act. In the entire scheme of Pension Act and rules there is nothing to prevent the employees from entering into a contract (for any prompt gain) in bargain with their post retirement or pensionary benefits. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | ||
| 1078 | 2020 CLC 1173 | H.C.A 381/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Jamil (Appellant) VS Mst. Waheeda Aslam & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 19-JUL-19 | Yes | It is plaintiff (respondent No.1) who has come for execution of decree of money. Now money decree was matured only on account of her relinquishment of share in the immovable property being auctioned. Had she not relinquished her share in the property, her money decree would not have been passed. The property which she relinquished was auctioned for her money decree | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | C.P.527-K/2019 Mst: Waheeda Aslam and others v. Muhammad Jamil and others,C.P.592-K/2019 Ali Sufyan and another v. Muhammad Jamil and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned,Pending Dismissed as Not Pressed |
| 1079 | Const. P. 1208/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2020 | Dr. Zafar Ul Haq & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-NOV-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 1080 | Const. P. 110/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Mir Muhammad and others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1081 | 2020 PTD 1952 | Const. P. 4867/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Qasim International Container Terminal (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 06-JAN-20 | Yes | The main object of the Customs Act, 1969 is to make it expedient to consolidate and amend the law relating to levy and collection of customs duties, fee and service charges and to provide for other allied matters. So it does not matter that the amending provisions do not itself qualify as one imposing duties and taxes etc. All other ancillary and allied provisions in the Customs Act are meant to facilitate the officials to carry out their main objective and mandate and that is the collection of duties and taxes by applying law. Customs Act is nothing but a fiscal Statute meant to extract customs duties and other taxes. A simple reading of Article 73(2) (a to g), may distract the ideal conclusion but it is to be seen that these very amendments are inserted in a fiscal statute, the main object of which is to extract duties, taxes etc. These amendments are thus nothing but to toe and facilitate the main object of the statute and hence it is ancillary and incidental to main object of imposition, abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of any tax which they would ultimately perform while performing their duties within the premises of these private port/terminal operators to whom licenses were issued. Each statute carry different mechanics to assign a varying meaning of the "same word". The meaning of same word may vary from one legislation to another and it is the Statute and the very provision itself that would determine as to which varying definition would come into play to carry the object of such legislation. In order to find intent of word in any provision of statute, it is always wise or logical to discover individual meaning of a solitary word first, however at times it is to be read in connection with entire provisions to find logical meaning closer to the functioning of the Statute and provisions. A word may have potential to be explained differently. Meaning of a word discovered judicially to understand a provision of statute does not necessarily be applied to provision of another Statute as it may dis-balance the scheme of that Statute. It may tend to carry same meaning in a similar Statute, if used in different provisions/Sections etc. but may not necessarily carry same intent in another Statute. Entertaining an application by an adjudicating authority is altogether different in the present contest as they (port operator) do not enjoy such authority and authorization as far as adjudication is concerned. Certificate itself is adjudication by someone having authority in this regard which require no more deliberation by private port operators. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | C.P.426/2020 Qasim International Container Terminal Pakistan Ltd, Karachi & others v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Secretary, Revenue Division, M/o Finance, Islamabad & others,C.A.194/2020 Qasim International Container Terminal Pakistan Ltd, Karachi & others v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Secretary, Revenue Division, M/o Finance, Islamabad & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted/Stay,Pending |
| 1082 | Const. P. 3004/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2017 | Muhammad Ramzan and others (Petitioner) VS Ch. Ghulam ali & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1083 | 2021 YLR 867 | Const. P. 6168/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Sardar Abdul Hameed (Petitioner) VS The Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-JAN-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | |||
| 1084 | Const. P. 1404/2010 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Mst. Rasheda Parveen and others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-DEC-20 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 1085 | Const. P. 3798/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2017 | Ms. Sumaya Akhtar (Petitioner) VS Governor of Sindh/Chancellor U.O.S, Jamshoro & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-FEB-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1086 | Const. P. 1400/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Lt. Commander (R) Engr: Abdul Aziz Narejo (Petitioner) VS K.P.T and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 23-OCT-19 | Yes | Though he was appointed in the year 1996 on ad-hoc and the appointment apparently was not regular one yet the petitioner has spent more than two decades with a hope that no later, the post would fallen vacant, he will be considered. The record reflects that he is still being considered as ad-hoc. This status throughout his career has not earned him anything except that he has faced certain charges which he defended and that he being deprived of further promotion on account of such status. The period of ad-hoc appointment should not have prevailed for such a long period. In case the authority had no complaints as far as the conduct and working of the petitioner is concerned, steps should have been taken by the authority to regularize the services of the petitioner. The authority remained indolent and petitioner continued as ad-hoc. The record shows that the only ground whereby he was deprived of any such promotion is that he was an ad-hoc employee. Thus, while we consider that his very appointment was not made on regular basis in BPS-18, we are also conscious of the fact that the petitioner has served more than two decades without any prospects of promotion | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry | |||
| 1087 | Const. P. 401/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Zakir Hussain Larik (Petitioner) VS Provice of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-JAN-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 1088 | Const. P. 2514/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Bashir Ahmed (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-JAN-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1089 | Const. P. 7112/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Nasir Ahmed Butt (Petitioner) VS Mst. Shaheen Afroz and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 25-JAN-21 | Yes | Family Pension | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | |||
| 1090 | Suit.B 2/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Bankers Equity Limited. (Plaintiff) VS Galadari Cement (Gulf) Ltd., & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 19-NOV-22 | Yes | The primary consideration however remains that Order I Rule 10(2) CPC which is being heard, does not allow the applicant to be either necessary or proper party. Necessary party is one who ought to have been joined as party in whose absence no effective decree could be passed whereas proper party is one whose presence before the Court is necessary to enable the Court to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1091 | Const. P. 2196/2011 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | M/S Fintex Mfg Corp Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Prov. of Sindh and ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.A.1601/2021 Fintex MFG. Corporation Pvt Ltd Karachi v. The Province of Sindh, through the Secretary, Excise & Taxation Department, Karachi and others,C.P.5582/2021 Fintex MFG. Corporation Pvt Ltd Karachi v. The Province of Sindh, through the Secretary, Excise & Taxation Department, Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending ,Pending Leave Granted. Interim Relief | ||
| 1092 | Const. P. 4060/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s M3 Technologies Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Commissioner IR (Appeals-II) and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1093 | Const. P. 4791/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s HSJ Metal (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1094 | Const. P. 4801/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | DHL Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1095 | Const. P. 7392/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Khawaja Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1096 | Const. P. 6091/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Sakrand Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1097 | Const. P. 361/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mst. Sania and another (Petitioner) VS Babar Riaz and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1098 | Const. P. 5079/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s BST Services (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1099 | Const. P. 4838/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Jaguar Shipping Line (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1100 | Const. P. 4280/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Khurram Gul Agha (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1101 | Const. P. 5573/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Qureshi Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1102 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 665/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Tri Angles Company (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1103 | Const. P. 5612/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | The Souse Keeper (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1104 | 2021 SBLR Sindh 2413 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 913/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Parkash Lal (Applicant) VS Deputy Collector of Customs & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-SEP-21 | Yes | Critical examination of ibid provision reveals that there are no consequential effects provided under Section 194-B of Customs Act, 1969 to a decision beyond 60 days??? time or within such extended period, as the Tribunal may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, fix. The word ???shall??? alone cannot demonstrate the mandatory test of the provision. What is more essential is the consequences and further test such as penal action, if prescribed. In the absence of such consequences or penal action the word ???shall??? alone cannot be construed as the time frame being mandatory when the Tribunal itself has been given authority to extend the period as deemed fit by it. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||
| 1105 | Const. P. 1507/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Zam Zam Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1106 | Const. P. 4914/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Deepak J. Motiani (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1107 | Const. P. 5463/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Habib Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1108 | Const. P. 4550/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Prime Trading Co. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1109 | 2021 YLR 1021 | Cr.J.A 115/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2015 | Vijay Kumar & Other (Appellant) VS The State (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 24-NOV-20 | Yes | When the cause of death was found to be the incident on account of neurogenic shock of injuries No.1 and 2 i.e. wounds sloughing of flesh form right leg from thigh (mid) to ankle and abrasion on the left anterolateral side of Anus, it was inevitable for the prosecution to have obtained the sperm report of the sample found on the body and of the accused. It cannot be confidently said that the victim Vishal was subjected to humiliation of sodomy by the accused Vijay Kumar and Abbas Mallah since no such report of sperm test is available. --Even the alleged motive of ransom is not confidence inspiring as the Complainant???s family was a poor one. --There is no eye witness at all and even the story of the prosecution is not confidence inspiring as the boy who was allegedly abducted belongs to a poor class and it does not inspire confidence that somebody could abduct a child who belongs to a family from whom there are remote chances of any financial benefit. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||
| 1110 | Const. P. 7758/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | IGI Holdings Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.5665/2021 IGI Holdings Limited, Karachi v. Federation of Pakistan through its Secretary Revenue Division, Islamabad and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 1111 | Const. P. 4579/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Dolmen City Rent (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1112 | Const. P. 4588/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Raza Mehmood Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1113 | Const. P. 4698/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Dolmen (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1114 | 2022 PTD 345, 2022 PTCL 415 | Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 94/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Commissioner inland revenue legal (Applicant) VS M/s filters pakistan pvt. ltd. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-OCT-21 | Yes | Section 6 is pari materia to provisions for recovery of sale tax in respect of goods imported into Pakistan and time and manner shall be similar to that of recovery made under Customs Act, 1969. For the instant matter, for determining tax liability for the period 2011-12 limitation would perish by 30 June, 2017. Show cause notice was issued on 21.08.2017, after requisite period. Hence, any notice that was issued belatedly i.e. beyond the statutory requirement would have no bearing. --The consequential point that arises is whether a timeframe prescribed under Section 11(5) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 for issuance of show-cause notice and after the expiry of timeframe prescribed, could be extended and/or resurrected a time barred cause under SRO 394(I)/2001 dated 21.05.2009 read with Section 74 of the Act, 1990. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||
| 1115 | Const. P. 5007/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s J & S Enterprises (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1116 | Const. P. 5650/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Century Engineering Ind (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1117 | Const. P. 848/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/S. ADAMJEE IMPEX (Petitioner) VS SHAIKH MUHAMMAD KHALID & OTHERS (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 19-APR-21 | Yes | In view of above, I found that the orders passed under section 16(2) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was harsh inasmuch as it struck off the defence without a proper scrutiny of ledgers ofthe rent that has already been deposited in MRC, interestingly in the name of same landlord and there could have been no inconvenience to the respondent/landlord for the recovery of amount from such MRC. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1118 | Const. P. 5581/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Burshane LPG (Pakistan) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1119 | Const. P. 2607/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Nasir Engineering Works & Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1120 | I.T.R.A 16/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (Applicant) VS M/S. ROCHE PAKISTAN LTD. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-OCT-21 | No | We have also noticed that invariably references are being filed by the department where they themselves frame questions. We would appreciate if the counsels who are filing such references also apply their mind and after going to the root of the case and the cause as to what in fact serious questions of law arising out of the order and only then such proposed questions of the department could be finalized by the counsels themselves. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | |||
| 1121 | Const. P. 4625/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Citibank N.A (Petitioner) VS Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1122 | Const. P. 5496/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Tariq Mangrani (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1123 | Const. P. 1028/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Allah Rakha (Petitioner) VS Abdul Rehman (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-APR-21 | No | The petitioner was tenant of the subject premises of the respondent. Statutory notice under Section 18 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was served on the petitioner on 15.12.2017. It is claimed that the rent upto February 2018 was deposited in Suit No.1153/2008 in terms of order of court, however, notice under section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, was issued to the petitioner who, despite receipt of the notice, has not tendered the rent of March, 2018 till 17th October, 2018, when for the first time it is contended that the money order was sent. By that time the default of March to July, 2018 has already been committed, even if the rent was required to be deposited in 60 days of its becoming due. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1124 | Const. P. 7304/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Amcorp Engineering & Construction Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1125 | Const. P. 2661/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Gulzar & Sons (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1126 | 2022 MLD 308 | II.A. 205/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Ms. Qaiser Jehan Begum Thr. Salman Hussain Memon (Appellant) VS Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-APR-21 | Yes | the provisions of Section 42 were misconstrued by Courts below. A plaint could only be rejected under order VII rule 11 CPC if it is barred by law. None of the provisions of law was cited by respondent???s counsel and/or find mention in the orders/judgment of two Courts below whereby a plaint of the suit of the appellant could be rejected under order VII rule 11 CPC. The appellant had a cause of action on account of a threat to her property in view of alleged unlawful and illegal construction beingraised on the adjacent plot. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.815-K/2021 Amir Nisar v. Qaiser Jehan Begum & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending |
| 1127 | Cr.Bail 539/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | MANSOOR IQBAL S/O MUHAMMAD IQBAL (Applicant) VS THE STATE (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 06-MAY-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1128 | Const. P. 4109/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s ZIF Agencies (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1129 | Const. P. 3979/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Falcon-I (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1130 | Const. P. 1417/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s W.S Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1131 | Const. P. 5236/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Heinz Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1132 | Const. P. 4303/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Grid Solution Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1133 | Const. P. 308/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mst. Saima D/o Fareed ul Hassan (Petitioner) VS Mst. Marium Bibi and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 08-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1134 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 177/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Kaikobad Pestanjee Kakalia (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1135 | Const. P. 1274/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Byco Petroleum Pakistan Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1136 | Const. P. 1382/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Union Cooperative Club Ltd., Thr. M. Asim Khan (Petitioner) VS M/s. A.A.G. Foods and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 26-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1137 | Const. P. 4516/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Topine Securities Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1138 | Const. P. 4675/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Zain Brothers (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1139 | Const. P. 4665/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s TSD Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS FBR & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1140 | Const. P. 3994/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Khairpur Sugar Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1141 | Const. P. 2225/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | AGP Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.5378/2021 AGP Limited, Karachi v. Pakistan through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned. Delinked | ||
| 1142 | Const. P. 5575/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | M/s Creative Leather Ind (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1143 | Const. P. 3698/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Xara Soft (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1144 | Const. P. 3580/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Yasmeen Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1145 | Const. P. 4296/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Karachi Marriage Hall Associations (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1146 | Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 279/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Commissioner I-R Zone-IV (Applicant) VS M/s. Byco Petroleum Pakistan Limited (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1147 | Const. P. 6102/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Fine Star Ind Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 18-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1148 | Const. P. 4482/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s United King (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 28-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1149 | Const. P. 4549/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Oleocorp (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1150 | Const. P. 4667/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | TPL Properties Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1151 | Const. P. 874/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Ghazala Wd/o Noor Hassan (Petitioner) VS Samina Naz & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 13-NOV-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1152 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 246/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | D. G. Customs Valuation (Applicant) VS M/s. Forte Marketing Services (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1153 | Const. P. 3962/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | IGI Holdings Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.1553-K/2021 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. IGI Holdings Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Leave Granted, transfered to Islamabad. | ||
| 1154 | Const. P. 59/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Aryan Hussain S/o Muhammad Shahadat Hussain (Petitioner) VS The Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1155 | Suit 510/2013 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Muhammad Rafique (Plaintiff) VS Raja Mohammad Usman & Others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 08-SEP-15 | Yes | First Partnership Deed is between plaintiff and defendants No.1 and 7 to 10 and the second Partnership Deed is between plaintiff and defendants No.1 to 6. Hence, the two causes of action cannot be merged into one in order to avail the jurisdiction of this Court. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1156 | Const. P. 4725/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Medipak Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1157 | 2020 PLC CS Note 26 | Const. P. 4527/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Dr. Muhammad Aslam and Ors (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 02-DEC-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | |||
| 1158 | Const. P. 8807/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Imran Ind (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 05-JUL-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1159 | Const. P. 8948/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Muhammad Sajid (Petitioner) VS Govt. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-MAR-21 | Yes | Member of the Armed Forces--review petition pending before respondent No.1 may be ordered to be decided under the law. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | |||
| 1160 | Const. P. 4617/2013 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2013 | Irfan Gul Dars and Ors (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 26-NOV-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan | ||||
| 1161 | 2023 YLR 40 | Const. P. 891/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s United Business Machines thr Muhammad Aslam (Petitioner) VS Ghulam Hussain Hidayatullah & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 25-MAY-21 | Yes | -Section 15(2)(vii) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979requires demonstration of elements such as (i) honesty of purpose and (ii) reasonableness. From the statement of landlord/owner for the purpose of eviction of a tenant on the ground of personal bona fide need only an honest intention is to be deduced and there is no other formula to adjudge good and bad faith, for the purpose of eviction on the aforesaid count. If the Court on the scrutiny of the evidence comes to the conclusion that it was an honest intention then it would be immaterial whether he remained successful in achieving the object or not that is whether his son or daughter would join him in the business after completing their education. This requirement would be immaterial in the sense that the intention of the father in evicting the tenant was an honest one.Good faith is an abstract term not capable of any rigid definition and ordinary dictionary meaning describes it as "honesty of intention". -The primary requirement and condition precedent for invoking provision of Section 15(2)(vii) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 claiming relief on the ground of personal bonafide need of landlord in good faith is that the landlord should be honest in his approach and sincerity of his purpose should be manifested by irreversible evidence and surrounding circumstances. - Sufficiency of accommodation either for a commercial/industrial activity or for residential purpose is to be adjudged best by the landlord himself and it may vary not only on case to case basis but also on the basis of nature of business that one intends to establish an honest idea about future growth of the business and its prospects. Someone may have an idea of establishing humongous business set up and he may or may not be successful in achieving his object and plan but what is 9important, as a test, is the honesty of intention and there is nothing on record in the shape of cross-examination of the landlord/owner to demonstrate that it was not an honest and genuine intention for extending and enhancing business for himself and for his family members. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.1108-K/2021 M/s. United Business Machines v. Ghulam Hussain Hidayatullah & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Dismissed |
| 1162 | Const. P. 651/2004 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2004 | Shahid Sajjad (Petitioner) VS Dr. Ehesham Naseerul Haque & 3 Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 20-OCT-17 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1163 | 2022 PTD 796, 2022 SBLR Sindh 22 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 826/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Samad Enterprises (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-AUG-21 | Yes | the show-cause notice is without jurisdiction on the count that the customs authorities have not been conferred with the powers of adjudication as far as Sales Tax Act, 1990 and the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 are concerned. Customs Authorities have powers to collect sales tax/income tax etc. at the import stage in the capacity of collecting agents on the basis of registration certificate and the status is being adjudged by the registration authority itself. In the absence of any evidence which could contravene the requirements of the subject SRO, no other view is deducible as these are questions of facts alone, which are thus answered accordingly in favour of respondent and against the applicant. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.1602-K/2021 The Colelctor of Customs, Karachi v. M/s. Samad Enterprises Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (Notice) to Respondents |
| 1164 | Const. P. 440/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Syed Mustafa Qadri (Petitioner) VS Abbas Hashim & Others. (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1165 | 2022 SBLR Sindh 687 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 450/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Allied Engineering & Services Ltd. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-AUG-21 | Yes | As far as finalization of the provisional assessment in time is concerned, the provisional assessments were made on 07.09.2012 and it was required to be finalized within the time frame given under section 81(2) of the Customs Act i.e. six months. This finalization ought to have been completed by 06.03.2013 (incorrectly stated 07.03.2013) as the law requires finalization within six months. The final assessment was made on 15.05.2013. Reliance of the learned counsel for the applicant was placed on the note of Additional Director of Customs which forwarded a summary for the approval of the extension. Allegedly the time was extended on 20.03.2013 by 60 days. By the time the purported summary was granted, on 20.03.2013, six months??? time had already lapsed. The fact of the matter is that the time for finalization had already lapsed. Even if 60 days??? time is counted from the date when time lapsed i.e. 06.03.2013, it should not have gone beyond 06.05.2013 whereas final assessment was made on 15.05.2013. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||
| 1166 | Suit.B 124/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | NATIONAL BANK OF PAKSITAN (Plaintiff) VS FATEH TEXTILE MILLS LTD & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 07-FEB-17 | Yes | The presumption of truth cannot be said to be attached to a statement of account, which is not certified as required under Act 1891. Computer generated accounts may not have required attestation under Act 1891 for any other issue but not for considering the claim of the plaintiff as true and correct. Indeed such statement could be believed to be true in case it is ratified as above and on the assumption/confirmation that it is certified by the relevant officers concerned. Even in a computer generated statement, the statistics/figures are being fed by the accountants. These accountants were previously used to prepare ledger/accounts books through their own hands/manually hence the presumption of truth in relation to both the statements could only be said to be attached in case they are certified, as required under the law. --It is a settled principle of law that in case of conflict between special laws and general laws, special laws prevail. ----It is quite surprising that despite the judgment of Hon???ble Supreme Court, whereby the appointment of the President of the plaintiff bank was held to be unconstitutional, the Power of Attorney executed by such alleged president was continued to be implemented/ acted upon. This act of the plaintiff bank is not only contemptuous but also unlawful and illegal in view of the fact that the principal ceased to exist the moment the judgment was rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court insofar as the appointment of the president of the plaintiff bank is concerned | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1167 | Const. P. 2468/2010 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | M/S Tri-Star Power Ltd. (Petitioner) VS SECP and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 18-DEC-12 | Yes | Since a substantial right of petitioner was subjudiced in the Appeal No.15/2005 before the Appellate Bench therefore, the Division Bench of this Court was pleased to suspend the operation of the order and the trading of shares were restored. Presently there are findings of the Appellant Bench against the petitioner which are subject matter of Misc. Appeal No.04/2009 now renumbered as 74/2010. The miscellaneous appeal was kept pending under objection and the petitioner did not obtain any orders for suspension of the orders of Appellate Bench of SECP | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1168 | Suit 64/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | GHULAM RASOOL (Plaintiff) VS ASGHAR ALI (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 19-JAN-15 | Yes | No doubt it is a valid cause of action which has been utilized by the plaintiff but then cause of action and the proof of damages being sustained by the plaintiff are two independent issues. If the defendant has provided a cause to the plaintiff by filing this suit for malicious prosecution it does not absolve the plaintiff from established that he has in actual suffered such damages. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1169 | Suit.B 55/2009 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | M/S.MYBANK LTD (Plaintiff) VS M/S.APOLLO TEXTILE MILLS LTD (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 31-JAN-17 | Yes | The case under banking jurisdiction is governed by special statute i.e. Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 and in terms of Section 9(2) this special statute requires the statement of account to be certified under Act 1891. The provisions of this law would become redundant in case the contention of the plaintiff is considered to be correct. This sole ground is sufficient to grant unconditional leave to the defendants. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1170 | Const. P. 5142/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s Universal Auto Engineering (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1171 | Const. P. 4587/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Naseer Muhammad (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 03-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1172 | Const. P. 5385/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Farm Plant (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1173 | II.A. 215/2020 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Allah Bux S/o Muhammad Umer Baloch (Appellant) VS Shahnawaz and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 27-APR-21 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1174 | Const. P. 520/2009 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2009 | Masood Ahmad Bhatti. (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 14-MAY-13 | Yes | Perusal of the contract shows that it is one time concluded contract and the parties were neither coerced nor compelled to enter such adjustments. The VSS scheme was signed by the petitioner challenging certain statistics in terms of the length of service which he could have agitated before VSS Support Centre to initiate the appeal process which was to be decided within 180 days of the VSS announcing date. The petitioner did not opt for such process and has voluntarily signed the separation scheme. It is a binding and concluded contract and the petitioner cannot resile from the terms and conditions thereof. It is required to be accepted as it is or not at all as it is the spirit of the contract itself which says ???take it or leave it???. The petitioner???s claim appears to have been further adjusted only as a gesture of good-will when the package was enhanced to Rs.4,039,307/- and an additional amount of Rs.791,291/- was offered along with enhanced payable pension to the petitioner. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the petitioner has failed to substantiate his claim vis-??-vis final VSS settlement and release of his actual pension and other service benefits, however, since the petitioner is agitating his grievances since 2009 and the amount is also lying with the respondents, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the interest over such amount. Accordingly, while disposing of the petition vide short order dated 14.05.2013 the respondents were directed to pay interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 10.3.2008 till the entire amount is paid to the petitioner. . | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1175 | Const. P. 4942/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Mehtab Alam (Petitioner) VS Commissioner IR & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1176 | Const. P. 4977/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Isra Islamic Foundation (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1177 | Const. P. 249/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Bank Al-Habib Limited Thr. Sayyed Qalb e Abbas (Petitioner) VS Fayz e Husayni Trust and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 22-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1178 | Const. P. 246/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Nadir Khan S/o Muhammad Qasim Khan (Petitioner) VS Mst. Fareeda Nadir and another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-MAR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1179 | Const. P. 6765/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s State Bank of Pakistan Class - IV (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-JUL-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | ||||
| 1180 | Const. P. 7023/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Miracle Products (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1181 | 2017 PLC (CS) 409 | Suit 207/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | ARBAB A.MUNIR (Plaintiff) VS MACKINNONS MACKENZIE & CO (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 27-JAN-16 | Yes | Insofar as the amended clause-8A in the Supplemental Trust Deed for superannuation fund is concerned, since the plaintiff resigned much prior to the alleged amendment, it cannot be applied retrospectively though the subject clauses such as (ii) and (iii) of clause-8A of the aforesaid Deed have not been challenged but apparently it amounts to usurping the rights of the member/ pensioner who has throughout his life has done only one business and that it would be unlawful for a company to enforce such terms which are contrary and violative of the fundamental and constitutional rights as guaranteed. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 1182 | Const. P. 6426/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Conwill Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1183 | Const. P. 6359/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s International Entperises (Petitioner) VS Fed.of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1184 | Const. P. 1671/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Meskay & Fentee Trading Co. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1185 | Const. P. 7239/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammd Rahim (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1186 | Const. P. 1932/2011 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2011 | Rousch Pakistan Power Ltd (Petitioner) VS Prov of Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.A.1114/2021 M/s Rousch (Pakistan) Power Ltd. Karachi v. The Province of Sindh, through the Secretary Excise & Taxation Department, Sindh Karachi and another,C.P.4820/2021 M/s Rousch Pakistan Ltd Karachi v. The Province of Sindh, through the Secretary Excise & Taxation Department, Sindh Karachi and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending ,Pending Allowed, Leave Granted and Impugned Judgment suspended. | ||
| 1187 | Const. P. 7848/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Tajran-e-Umar Farooqui Market (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1188 | Const. P. 6609/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Battery Hodgson Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1189 | Const. P. 8570/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Nisar Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 16-DEC-21 | Yes | There is not an iota of evidence available to disagree with the observation of the Tribunal which ordered its (vehicle???s) release unconditionally however subject to verification of ownership. This being situation no question has arisen to deviate from the findings of the Tribunal and proposed question No.1 is answered in affirmative as the seizing agency has failed to comply with the provisions as required under section 26 of Customs Act, 1969 whereas the proposed questions No.2 is irrelevant for the purpose of declaring the subject vehicle as an smuggled vehicle. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | |||
| 1190 | Const. P. 4749/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Memon Motors (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS FBR and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1191 | Const. P. 7024/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Miracle Products (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1192 | Const. P. 2470/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s PSO Co. Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.219-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. M/s. Pakistan State Oil Company Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 1193 | Const. P. 2309/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | National Refinery Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.307-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. National Refinery Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 1194 | Const. P. 6892/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Sohail Aziz (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1195 | Const. P. 4888/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Ghandhara Ind Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1196 | Const. P. 2903/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Needle Impressions (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 26-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1197 | Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 731/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Collector of Customs (Applicant) VS M/s. Byco Petroleum Ltd. & another (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-21 | No | What is more important is whether the goods allegedly retrieved by the seizing agency were smuggled or belongs to Byco Petoleum Limited. Byco Petoleum Limited itself has come forward when they filed an appeal against the Order-in-Original dated 26.5.2015. The Order-in-Appeal was passed on 15.4.2015 on an appeal preferred by Byco Petoleum Limited followed by an appeal before tribunal when ultimately the Petoleum Company succeeded in establishing their point of view. The subject documents if were doubted should have been verified through the Management of the Petoleum Company and more particularly, the samples drawn should have been tested through any forensic lab having expertise in this regard, which has not been done. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1198 | Const. P. 4891/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Muhammad Jawad Naseer (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1199 | Const. P. 6996/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Danish Naseem (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 07-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1200 | Const. P. 6875/2017 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Distribution of Fast Moving Goods Co. Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1201 | Const. P. 3787/2015 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | M/s Rajby Industries (Petitioner) VS Rahim Dad And ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 30-OCT-19 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author) | C.P.684-K/2019 M/s Rajby Industries v. Rahim Dad Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Disposed of | ||
| 1202 | Const. P. 6598/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Liberty Power Tech Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1203 | Const. P. 2407/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Shell Pakistaqn Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.211-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Shell Pakistan Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 1204 | Const. P. 2493/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Be Energy Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.233-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Be Energy Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 1205 | Const. P. 6446/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Lucky Ind (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1206 | Const. P. 2234/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Byco Petroleum Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author) | C.P.320-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Byco Petroleum Pakistan Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 1207 | Const. P. 7304/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Erum Tahir (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1208 | Const. P. 6425/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Meskay & Femtee Trading Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 04-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1209 | Const. P. 6756/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Imran Industries (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1210 | Const. P. 6725/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Sarfaraz Ali Pario (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 08-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1211 | Const. P. 6522/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Ahmed Fine Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1212 | Const. P. 2235/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Byco Petroleum Ltd (Petitioner) VS Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Judgement | 20-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal | C.P.317-K/2022 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Byco Petroleum Pakistan Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending Adjourned (-) Sajjad Ali Shah,J | ||
| 1213 | Const. P. 6397/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Murtaza Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 02-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1214 | Const. P. 6370/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s SEPCO Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 01-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1215 | M.A. 11/1996 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 1996 | M/s.Rachna Soap Ind (Appellant) VS Registrar Trade Mark (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-APR-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1216 | Suit -2904/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Masroor Ahmed Faiz (Plaintiff) VS Masood Ahmed Faiz & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 27-JAN-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1217 | 2014 YLR 2315 | Suit 1386/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | MS ROHEELA YASMIN (Plaintiff) VS MS. NEELOFAR HASSAN & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 21-APR-14 | Yes | "(a) Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961)--- ----S. 7---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XX, R. 13-Administration suit- Talaq-e-Bain- Effect--- Contention of plaintiff was that she being wife of deceased was entitled for deferred dower as well as share from his property whereas defendants contended that plaintiff had been divorced by the deceased and she was not legal heir to claim inheritance-Validity-Plaintiff was given Talaq-e-Bain and no question of reconciliation would arise---Such Talaq would become effective the moment same was pronounced-Plaintiff was not entitled for any inheritance however claim of dower amount was debt on the property of deceased which was to be paid first. (b) Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961)- --S. 7---Divorce--- Effectiveness of--- Scope---Marriage could abe dissolved by husband at his will without intervention of the court-Man who wished to divorce his wife should as soon as might be after pronouncement of Talaq give the Chairman Union Council a notice in writing of his having done so and should supply a copy thereof to the wife---Talaq would not be effective until the expiry of 90 days unless same was revoked earlier expressly or otherwise. (c) Islamic Law--- ---Talaq, Mubarat and Khula-Meaning-- -""Talaq"" was divorce which was pronounced by the husband whereas ""Mubarat"" was Talaq effected by mutual consent of parties and ""Khula"" was dissolution of marriage through court. (d) Islamic Law-- ----Talaq, kinds of-Scope-Talaq would be of three kinds i.e. Talaq-e-Ahsan, Talaq-e-Hassan and Talaq-e-Bain-Talaq-e-Ahsan could be pronounced by single pronouncement during ""Tuhrs"" followed by abstinence from going to wife to establish marital relationship till Iddat period-Talaq-e-Hassan was pronounce-ment of divorce through successive three ""Tuhrs"" without establishing physical relationship with wife in any of the three ""Tuhrs""---Talaq-e-Bain was the divorce by husband through pronouncement made through single ""Tuhr"" either in one sentence or in separate sentences---Talaq-e-Bain was irrevocable divorce whereas Talaq-e-Ahsan would become irrevocable on expiry of Iddat period and Talaq-e-Hassan on third pronouncement irrespective of Iddat period-Talaq-e-Bain would become irrevocable immediately on pronouncement of the same either uttered orally or written down on a piece of paper irrespective of Iddat period-Talaq-e-Bain did not provide any room for any reconciliation-Communication was not material ingredients or prerequisite for validity of Talaq." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 1218 | 2016 PLC (CS) 92 | Suit 519/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2014 | Ali Ahmed Lund (Plaintiff) VS Federation of Pakistan & ors (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 29-MAY-14 | Yes | "Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973--- ----R. 12-A---Correction of date of birth in service record---Scope---Contention of plaintiff was that his date of birth was 2-4-1956 instead of 2-4-1954---Validity---Plaintiff passed Central Superior Service examination in the year 1983 and became civil servant in the said year and he had been since then maintaining his date of birth as 2-4-1954---Employee could not rectify his date of birth after insertion of R.12-A in Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973---After 30 years of service it had revealed to the plaintiff that his actual date of birth was 2-4-1956---Once date of birth in the record at the time of joining service was mentioned the same should be final and no alteration was permissible--- Insertion of R.12-A in Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973 was logical and statutory in nature---Suit being not maintainable was dismissed in circumstances---Plaintiff had reached to the age of superannuation and any salary, perks, privileges or any benefits availed subsequent to the age of superannuation should be returned forthwith." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 1219 | Civil Revision 186/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2010 | Saddaruddin J. Bihimani Khuaja and Others (Applicant) VS Sultan -ul-Haq Qureshi (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 02-NOV-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1220 | Const. P. 6638/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Diamond Impex Corp (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1221 | Const. P. 5043/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | M/s Safa Steel (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 17-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1222 | Const. P. 2336/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Safa Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1223 | Suit 744/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | M/s.Reliance Consultancy & Eng. Wprls (Pvt) Ltd. (Plaintiff) VS Civial Aiation Authority & another. (ISSUES) (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 04-MAY-16 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1224 | Suit 170/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | SYED MUSTAFA NAWAB ZAIDI (Plaintiff) VS MS KHADIJA ZAIDI & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 17-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1225 | Const. P. 1330/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s DRE (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1226 | Const. P. 751/2014 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2014 | Muhammad Ishaque & others (Petitioner) VS Shamsuddin & others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 26-OCT-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1227 | Suit 987/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | M/s. Project Managers. (Plaintiff) VS M/s. Descon Engineering Ltd., & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 24-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1228 | Const. P. 1841/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Mohammad Faizan Usman (Petitioner) VS D.G MDA and Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 22-JAN-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 1229 | Const. P. 764/2008 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2008 | The Cantonment Board Faisal. (Petitioner) VS The Civil Aviation Authority & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 13-SEP-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1230 | Const. P. 3513/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s First Paramount Modaraba (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 23-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1231 | R.A (Civil Revision) 146/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Syed Wali Muhammad S/o Late Syed Ali Muhammad (Applicant) VS Syed Ameer Muhammad and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 29-JAN-20 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1232 | Suit.B 23/2012 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2012 | PAIR INVESTMENT CO LTD (Plaintiff) VS POLYGON DEVELOPERS & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 30-OCT-14 | Yes | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1233 | Const. P. 840/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Gas & Oil Ltd (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 10-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | C.P.6040/2021 Gas & Oil Pakistan Limited Lahore v. The Province of Sindh through the Chief Secretary, Karachi and others,C.A.1638/2021 Gas & Oil Pakistan Limited Lahore v. The Province of Sindh through the Chief Secretary, Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending ,Pending Summons Discharged (4 Weeks granted) | ||
| 1234 | Const. P. 6259/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | Mst. Syeda Anisa Bano (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 11-FEB-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 1235 | Const. P. 147/2004 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2004 | A Khan Oil Mill (Petitioner) VS Hyderabad Electric Supply (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-MAY-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1236 | Const. P. 346/2008 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2008 | Muhammad Haneef Memon (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Asif and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 21-JAN-19 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1237 | Const. P. 1125/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2018 | Hakim Ali & another (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | C.P.764-K/2022 Hakim Ali & another v. Province of Sindh through the Secretary, Local Government Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 1238 | Const. P. 1197/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur | 2018 | Zahoor Ahmed Abbasi (Petitioner) VS Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 09-AUG-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio | ||||
| 1239 | Const. P. 721/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad; attached cases: NTS Matter | 2022 | Mst. Hakim Zadi & another (Petitioner) VS P.O.Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 19-MAY-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 1240 | Const. P. 2014/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Abdul Wahid & Ord (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 14-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 1241 | Const. P. 83/2016 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2016 | Mohammad Suleman (Petitioner) VS Abdul Rasheed and others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 05-MAR-18 | Yes | In the present case it was a heavy burden upon the appellant to disprove the execution of such lease or to prove a collusive execution of lease but failed in such attempt. In terms of Articles 70 and 72 of the Qanoon-e-Shahdat Order, 1984 the registered instrument must yield in favour of oral evidence. The registered instrument would always carry a presumption of truth and a very strong and exceptional evidence is needed to dislodge the inference of truthfulness and genuineness of such document. It may have been said by the Deputy Director Land, Lyari that the issue can be resolved by summoning the officer from Excise & Taxation Department who may verify the number but it was not satisfactorily established by the appellant by summoning the witness. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1242 | Const. P. 643/2016 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2016 | Soomrio & another (Petitioner) VS Provinceof Sindh & Ors. (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | C.P.813-K/2022 Soomrio Bheel & another v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan | Pending | ||
| 1243 | Const. P. 440/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Nazeer Ahmed (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 21-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 1244 | R.A (Civil Revision) 192/1995 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 1995 | Allah Bux and other (Applicant) VS Ahmed Ali and other (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1245 | I. A 25/2019 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Lal Chand (Appellant) VS Abdul Razzaq Sanai & another (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 25-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1246 | Const. P. 437/2012 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2012 | Province of Sindh and others (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Afzal and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 1247 | Suit 1001/2010 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2010 | MST.CHAND BI KHAN (Plaintiff) VS MUBASHIR HUSSAIN AFRIDI & ORS. (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 10-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1248 | Suit -2773/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | SAEED RAZA KHAN (Plaintiff) VS PAKISTAN STATE OIL COMPANY LTD (PSO) & AOTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 03-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1249 | Const. P. 763/2018 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2018 | Fida Hussain (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 27-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 1250 | Suit 313/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | M/S S B TEXTILE MILLS (Plaintiff) VS SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LIMITED & ANOTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 09-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1251 | Const. P. 6027/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Fatima Fertilizers Co. (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 15-OCT-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1252 | Const. P. 813/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Allah Rakha & andothers (Petitioner) VS Muhammad Rafique Lawalni (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 28-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 1253 | Suit 367/2022 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2022 | MUHAMMAD SALMAN (Plaintiff) VS PROVINCE OF SINDH & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 08-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1254 | Const. P. 1648/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2021 | Tara Chand (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 06-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 1255 | Const. P. 2098/2017 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2017 | Syed Shahzad Ali S/o Syed Shabbir ALi (Petitioner) VS Abdul Ghaffar & Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Judgement | 14-MAY-18 | Yes | There cannot be any evidence structure of which not pleaded in written statement. It appears to be an attempt to support the allegations in respect of the property in question, as undertaken by some of the brothers of respondent who are in dispute as to its title. However the definition of landlord and owner are defined which would restrict tenant to probe once they consider respondent as their landlord. | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | |||
| 1256 | Const. P. 5549/2020 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2020 | Muhammad Usman Qureshi (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 12-FEB-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon | ||||
| 1257 | Const. P. 1027/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Faraz Enterprises (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 31-DEC-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1258 | Const. P. 989/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Habibullah (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 29-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | ||||
| 1259 | Const. P. 504/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Syed Rehman Ali Shah (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh and others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 05-APR-22 | No | NTS 2013 matters | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah | |||
| 1260 | 2017 PTD 1852 | Suit 991/2015 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2015 | China Harbour Engineering Co., Ltd. (Plaintiff) VS Pakistan & Others. (Defendant) | S.B. | Judgement | 24-JUL-15 | Yes | "Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)---- ----Ss. 121, 124(4), 129, 132 & 137(2)---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss. 39, 42 & 54---Suit for cancellation, declaration and permanent injunction---Best judgment assessment---Assessment giving effect to an order---Disposal of appeal by the Appellate Tribunal---Due date for payment of tax---Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) had been directed to decide the plaintiff's appeal within certain period and till final disposal of the plaintiff's appeal, the defendants had been restrained from taking any coercive action against the plaintiff---Tabulation made by the plaintiff, wherein certain heads of account had been either deleted or sent for rectification under S. 221 of Income Tax Ordnance, 2001, was not disputed---In terms of S. 124 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, where direct relief was provided in order under Ss. 129 & 132 of the Ordinance, the Commissioner would issue Appeal Effect Order within two months of the date the Commissioner was served with the order---In pursuance of S. 137 (2) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, where any tax was payable under assessment order or amended assessment order or any other order issued by the Commissioner under the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, a notice would be served upon the taxpayer in the prescribed form specifying the amount payable and thereupon the sum so specified would be paid within 15 days from the date of the service of the notice---Original demand notice had been issued prior to amended assessment; hence, the same was not sufficient compliance of issuing notice of demand in pursuance of amended assessment to provide opportunity of 15 days specifying the total amount in pursuance of amended assessment---Compliance to Ss. 124 (4) & 137(2) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was necessary---Appeal Effect Order was an amended assessment tabulation and the same had to be given effect like any other amended decree---High Court directed the defendants to deposit the amount, which had been recovered by them from the Bank account of the plaintiff, in the Court till further orders." | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||
| 1261 | R.A (Civil Revision) 318/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | Jethanand (Applicant) VS Mumtaz Ali and Others (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 16-OCT-15 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1262 | Suit 525/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | NASIR AHMED & ANOTHER (Plaintiff) VS M/S. CREEK MARINA (PVT) LIMITED & ANOTHER (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 15-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1263 | Suit 944/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | ATTOCK PETROLEUM LIMITED (Plaintiff) VS ANIS ALI & OTHERS (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 09-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1264 | Const. P. 6498/2021 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | M/s Glitter House (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 16-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1265 | Const. P. 2580/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2019 | Nisar & Others (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 20-APR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 1266 | Suit 1738/2021 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2021 | Muhammad Rashid Khan (Plaintiff) VS Mst. Naila & others (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 03-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1267 | Const. P. 2772/2019 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2019 | M/s Rauf Traders (Petitioner) VS Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 24-NOV-21 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan | ||||
| 1268 | R.A (Civil Revision) 167/2011 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2011 | M/S Sindh Abadgar Sugar Mills Ltd (Applicant) VS Taluka Municipal Administrator & Ors (Respondent) | S.B. | Order | 31-AUG-17 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||
| 1269 | Const. P. 3/2022 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad | 2022 | Sikandar Ali (Petitioner) VS P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent) | D.B. | Order | 30-MAR-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author) | ||||
| 1270 | Suit 790/2018 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi | 2018 | Muhammad Ayub Mughal & another (Plaintiff) VS Muhammad Shahzad (Defendant) | S.B. | Order | 03-FEB-22 | No | Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) | ||||