Top Searched Caselaw (Judgments / Orders ) of all Hon'ble Judges

Top Searched Caselaw (Judgments / Orders ) of the all Hon'ble Judges


Note: The Sorting of following cases is based on the search by public, Litigant.It does not reflect Ranking of Hon'ble Judges.

1) 2149/2015 Const. P. Abdul Hameed and another (Petitioner) V/S Provicne of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 30-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


2) 1019/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Ayaz Khan & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:A Divisional Bench of this Court comprising of Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan, has pronounced the judgment on 24.07.2020 in the case of Muhammad Ayaz Khan and others v. Federation of Pakistan & others (along with C.P.No.D-1046/2019), whereby, Members of the Establishment of Sindh High Court and Members of Establishment of the Establishment of sub-ordinate judiciary of Province of Sindh, expressed their grievance against withholding of income tax by the Accountant General Sindh on the amounts paid towards Judicial Allowance and Special Judicial Allowance by treating the same as part of their salary income chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. The Hon'ble bench of Sindh High Court has been pleased to allow both these petitions in the following terms:- "In view of hereinabove facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that amount of judicial allowance and special judicial allowance paid to the Members of establishment of Sindh High Court as well as to the Members of the establishment of sub-ordinate judiciary of Province of Sindh falls within the exclusion in terms of clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, therefore, not part of their taxable salary income, hence, not chargeable to Tax or deduction under Section 149 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. Accordingly, withholding of income tax on the aforesaid amounts is hereby declared to be illegal and without lawful authority. Consequently, both the constitutional petitions are allowed along with listed applications. Respondents are directed not to withhold any amount of income tax from judicial allowance and special judicial allowance of the Members of establishment of Sindh High Court as well as the Members of establishment of sub-ordinate judiciary in Province of Sindh. The amounts already deducted from the salary of the Members of establishment of Sindh High Court as well as to the sub-ordinate judiciary, shall be refunded by the FBR, on their filing refund applications in accordance with law, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of such claims."
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan
Order Date: 24-JUL-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.484-K/2020 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Muhammad Ayaz Khan & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


3) 2650/2019 Const. P. Ms. Saba (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:ADJ appointment/retest case
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 17-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.429-K/2019 Ms. Saba v. The Province of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


4) 903/2007 Suit Allah Dino Khaskheli (Plaintiff) V/S HBL (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Damages employement HBL
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 08-AUG-16
Approved for Reporting


5) 451/2016 Const. P. Ghulam Ali (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Sindh Tenancy Act 1950 (Peasants Rights (Sindh Tenancy Act 1950)), Sindh Tenancy Act, 1950
Tag Line:Sindh Tenancy Act, 1950
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 01-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


6) 615/2014 Const. P. Mst. Zarina Begum (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahnawaz Tariq, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 12-JUN-14
Approved for Reporting


7) 89/2015 Cr.Acq.A. SYED MUHAMMAD AHSAN (Appellant) V/S MUNAWAR ALI NAQVI & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 (Section 8), Criminal Procedure Code (Sub-section 4 of Section 403)
Tag Line:(a) Illegal Dispossession Act (XI of 2005)- ----Ss. 3, 5 & 7---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 265-H & 417(2A)---Appeal against acquittal--- Appreciation of evidence--- Illegal dispossession---Declaration to title---Proof---Appellant was complainant and was aggrieved of dispossession from subject property by accused persons---Trial Court under S. 265-H(i), Cr.P.C. acquitted accused persons---Validity---Law of land and even Shia Personal Law did not authorize Momineen of any locality to request anyone amongst themselves to unlawfully control or occupy immovable property of an orphanage owned by some registered private institution with intention to dispossess, grab, control or occupy said property and dispossess otherwise lawful occupiers of such property---Accused persons, despite backing of so-called religious scholars and their goodwill in community were conscious of fact that they had no moral authority or legal defense to justify taking over possession of subject property and grab and control of resources of private institution---Accused persons never filed any civil suit to seek declaration of their title in respect of subject property as they knew that their so-called working committee was not even fraudulently registered---High Court set aside judgment of acquittal passed by Trial Court and convicted accused persons under S. 3(2) of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 along with fine---Appeal was allowed accordingly. 2010 YLR 2139; Muhammad Akram and 9 others v. Muhammad Yousuf and another 2009 SCMR 1066; PLD 1989 SC 283; PLD 1971 SC 550; 2012 CLC 793; Shahabuddin v. The State PLD 2010 SC 725; Mumtaz Hussain v. Dr. Nasir Khan and others 2010 SCMR 1254; Shaikh Muhammad Naseem v. Mst. Farida Gul 2016 SCMR 1931 and Mst. Gulshan Bibi and others v. Muhammad Sadiq and others PLD 2016 SC 769 ref. (b) Illegal Dispossession Act (X1 of 2005)--- ----S. 3---Illegal dispossession---Abandoned property---Principle---Even abandoned property is supposed to be in constructive possession of its lawful owner---If at all there is any defect in status of owner to hold, occupy and control subject property of private institution, accused are not supposed to contravene S. 3(1) of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005. (c) Illegal Dispossession Act (X1 of 2005)--- ----Ss. 3 & 5---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 92---Illegal dispossession---Criminal and civil liabilities---Determination---Accused persons cannot contend that complainant has no lawful authority to file legal proceedings in view of S. 92, C.P.C. when raised before a court seized of a criminal case---Proceedings under Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 cannot be regulated by Civil Procedure Code, 1908. Zafar Ahmad and 5 others v. The State and 3 others PLD 2007 Lah. 231 and Bashir Ahmed v. Additional Sessions Judge PLD 2010 SC 661 ref
Citation:2020 YLR Sindh 1
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 17-JUL-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.161-K/2019,Crl.P.166-K/2019,Crl.P.158-K/2019,Crl.P.913/2019,Crl.P.987/2019,Crl.A.403/2019,Crl.A.404/2019,Crl.A.405/2019,Crl.A.406/2019,Crl.A.407/2019 SCP Status:Disposed Leave Granted( Notice in Crl.MAs for suspension of sentence in all cases for 29.10.2019),Disposed Leave Granted( Notice in Crl.MAs for suspension of sentence in all cases for 29.10.2019),Disposed Leave Granted( Notice in Crl.MAs for suspension of sentence in all cases for 29.10.2019),Disposed Leave Granted( Notice in Crl.MAs for suspension of sentence in all cases for 29.10.2019),Disposed Leave Granted( Notice in Crl.MAs for suspension of sentence in all cases for 29.10.2019),Disposed Allowed with direction to Auqaf Department, Govt. of Sindh.,Disposed Allowed with direction to Auqaf Department, Govt. of Sindh.,Disposed Allowed with direction to Auqaf Department, Govt. of Sindh.,Disposed Allowed with direction to Auqaf Department, Govt. of Sindh.,Disposed Allowed with direction to Auqaf Department, Govt. of Sindh.


8) 208/2015 Suit Mirza Shakir Baig (Plaintiff) V/S Miss. Iffat Chughtai & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 22-MAR-16
Approved for Reporting


9) 2847/2017 Const. P. Sajjad Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan
Tag Line:Declare that naming, renaming any street, road, government institute, town, or city after the name of any individual having no positive social, role, courage or exceptional dedication to service in ways that bring special credit to an area, city town is illegal, unlawful against the basic rights of citizens of particular areas, towns, cities and public at large.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 24-JUL-19
Approved for Reporting


10) 2533/2019 Const. P. Asif Ali (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Deceased Son Quota, Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion andTransfer) Rules,1974 (Rule 11-A)
Tag Line:Sindh Government /Police Department cannot circumvent the law to make recruitment to the post of ASI on the basis of Son/Shaheedquota by issuing Standing Ordersor by invoking Rule 11-A of Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion andTransfer) Rules,1974 and Sindh Shaheed Recognition and Compensation Act, 2014by relaxing the requisite qualification for appointment in the disciplinary force. The appointment of ASI can only be made through competitive process on merit.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 16-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.392-K/2019 Asif Ali v. Province of Sindh thr. Secy: Home Deprtt: Govt. of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


11) 4/2011 H.C.A Salehbhoy through LRs (In person) (Appellant) V/S M/s. Pak Maniar Investment (Pvt.) Limited and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sadiq Hussain Bhatti, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 22-NOV-12
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.41-K/2013 Salehbhoy v. M/s Pak Maniar Investment (Pvt.) Limited and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Not Reached


12) 2477/2019 Const. P. Hajj Organizers Association of Pakistan (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 26-JUN-19
Approved for Reporting


13) 3415/2017 Const. P. Dr. Uzma Shaheen Pirzada (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Pension matters)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1100
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.614-K/2017 Dr.Uzma Shaheen Pirzada v. Province of Sindh and others,C.A.9-K/2019 Dr.Uzma Shaheen Pirzada v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted [ Early date ],Disposed Disposed of


14) 4843/2013 Const. P. Maj. Rtd. Tariq Lodhi (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Khalida Jilajni and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 21-AUG-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.528-K/2017 Maj.(Retd) Tariq Lodhi v. Mst: Khalida Jilani and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


15) 69/2011 Cr.Rev Akhtar Pervaiz Qrueshi (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 14-APR-12
Approved for Reporting


16) 6550/2020 Const. P. Abdul Raheem @ Manghar (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Encroachment on irrigation land.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 18-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


17) 12/2010 Const. P. Safdar Ali Sahito (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 01-MAR-11
Approved for Reporting


18) 230/2016 S.M.A In the matter of Letter of Administration of deceased Tahir Ahmed Khan (Petitioner) V/S Nil (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: International Law, Civil Procedure Law (UAE), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Section 13.), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Section 44.)
Tag Line:Pakistan Act 1990,UK Civil Procedure Law (UAE)
Citation:2019 PLD Sindh 130, 2017 SBLR Sindh 2034
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 02-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting


19) 763/2021 Const. P. Ayub Khan (Petitioner) V/S The Dist & Session Judge West and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:the appointment of sons of deceased/retired and serving employees of the District and subordinate Courts--whether the Petitioner???s son is entitled to be appointed on the son quota basis in view of policy decision /directives of the Hon???ble Chief Justice of this Court vide letters dated 03.03.2010, 23.7.2012 & 4.3.2013--In the light of the above rule position, no further action is required on our part in exercising the power under Article 199 of the Constitution on the premise that petitioner failed to point out any administrative decision of the member of the subordinate judiciary; and, merely agitating the claim that his son was not accommodated in the Judicial District was/is no ground to direct the respondent No.1 to appoint his son. However, the petitioner is at liberty to apply for the post on merit as and when the vacancy occurs in the office of District & Sessions, Judge Karachi West.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.544-K/2021 Ayub Khan v. The District & Sessions Judge Karachi (West) & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


20) 1731/2009 Suit JEHANGIR SIDDIQUI (Plaintiff) V/S NOMAN ABID INVESTMENT MANAGMENT & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 24-MAY-12
Approved for Reporting


21) 2157/2008 Const. P. Muhammad Saleem Shaikh. (Petitioner) V/S Prov. of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Judgment passed by Hon???ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi in the petitions filed to challenge the Combined Competitive Examination 2003 (CCE-2003) conducted by Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC). The Hon???ble Judges constituted a High Powered Inquiry Commission to probe and submit the report to the competent authority.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 13-FEB-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.413-K/2020,C.P.406-K/2020,C.P.407-K/2020,C.P.408-K/2020,C.P.409-K/2020,C.P.410-K/2020,C.P.411-K/2020,C.P.412-K/2020 SCP Status:Pending Adjourned,Pending Adjourned,Pending Adjourned,Pending Adjourned,Pending Adjourned,Pending Adjourned,Pending Adjourned,Pending Adjourned


22) 262/2010 Civil Revision Mst. Farasa Aijaz (Applicant) V/S M/s. Qamran Construcation (Pvt) Ltd & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 19-APR-12
Approved for Reporting


23) 1761/2020 Const. P. Abu Hashim & another (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Judgment in NADRA case passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan whereby the show cause notices issued under Section 18 of NADRA Ordinance, 2000 are quashed. The blocking of CNICs of the petitioners was declared illegal.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 19-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


24) 3757/2013 Const. P. Yaqoob Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Constitution of Pakistan (199)
Tag Line:A Divisional Bench of this Court comprising of Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar, has pronounced the judgment on 02.07.2020, filed by large number of petitioners, whereby, imposition of Income Support Levy at the rate of 0.5% on the value of Net Moveable Assets, through Income Support Levy Act, 2013, has been challenged for being ultravires to Constitution, as according to petitioners, subject levy did not possess the characteristic of a tax, therefore, could not be introduced through Finance Act 2013, along with Money Bill in terms of Article 73 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The subject levy was also challenged for being violative of the provisions of Article 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, as according to petitioners, Income Support Levy is discriminatory in nature, as it creates unreasonable classification between the same class of persons having Net Moveable Assets exceeding Rs.1.00 Million. The Hon?ble Divisional Bench of this Court, after having examined in detail all the constitutional and legal points involved in these petitions, has been pleased to allow the petitions in the following terms:- (i) The levy imposed through Income Support Levy Act, 2013 alongwith Money Bill, does not possess the characteristics of a tax, as it is not a common burden for raising revenue to be utilized for general public purpose, on the contrary, it is a levy in the nature of fund to be charged and utilized for a specific purpose i.e. ?to provide for financial resources for raising an income support fund for the economically distressed persons and their families?. Accordingly, the Income Support Levy Act, 2013, could not be introduced through Finance Act, 2013, in terms of Article 73 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the same is hereby declared to be ultra vires to the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. (ii) The levy imposed through Income Support Levy Act, 2013, is hereby declared to be ultravires to the Constitution for being discriminatory, as it creates unreasonable classification within the same class of person i.e. persons having Net Moveable Wealth exceeding Rs.1.00 M (One Million), whereas, its incidence and charge of levy falls un-equally upon the existing taxpayers only, who file or required to file Wealth Statement under Section 116 along with their Income Tax Return under Section 115 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, , however, non-existing taxpayers, who are not required under law, or do not file their Wealth Statement along with Income Tax Return, inspite of having much higher Net Moveable Wealth, exceeding Rs.1.00 M (One Million), have been excluded from the incidence and charge of such levy, which is in clear violation of Article 25 of the Constitution of Islamic of Pakistan, 1973. (iii) All the Notices and the proceedings, including assessment order(s) passed under Section 5 of the Income Support Levy Act, 2013 after repeal of the Income Support Levy Act, 2013, under clause 10 of the Finance Act, 2014, in the absence of any saving or validation clause to protect or validate the Income Support Levy Act, 2013 are hereby declared to be without jurisdiction and lawful authority.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 02-JUL-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.1396/2013 Commissioner Inland Revenue, Zone-I, Karachi v. Yaqoob Ahmed & others,C.P.1796/2013 Commissioner Inland Revenue, Zone-I, Karachi v. Yaqoob Ahmed & others,C.P.1237-K/2020 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Yaqoob Ahmed Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Infructuous,Disposed Leave Granted,Pending


25) 7470/2017 Const. P. Mst Almas Ismail (Petitioner) V/S Fayyaz Hussain & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 CLC 199, 2018 SBLR 1606
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 01-JUN-18
Approved for Reporting


26) 1630/1998 Suit NOTHERN POLYTHENE LTD (NPL) (Plaintiff) V/S NAT BANK OF PAK & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 MLD 782
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 27-FEB-13
Approved for Reporting


27) 6383/2015 Const. P. Tehseen Muzammil and others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:School Fees, Schools who have increased their tuition fees over 5% per annum for the last three years from the date of their respective registration/reregistration, no further enhancement be permitted until their re-registration whereupon enhancement be regulated in strict compliance of Sub-rule 7 (3) of the Rules 2002
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 07-OCT-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.869-K/2016 Generation School (Pvt) Ltd. and another v. Province of Sindh and others,C.A.11-K/2017 Generation School (Pvt) Ltd. and another v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Disposed Allowed


28) 2322/2014 Suit Dr. Arifa Farid and others (Plaintiff) V/S Mitha Khan and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Judgment in rem / personam, Exception to right of hearing
Tag Line:Exception to right of hearing; where the results can and would not have been any different. Dispute between the government departments should not affect bona fide purchasers. Judgment in rem / personam.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 24-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


29) 2389/2014 Suit Al-Tamash Medical Society (Plaintiff) V/S Dr. Anwar Ye Bin Je & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 MLD 785
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 16-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


30) 43/2013 Cr.Appeal Jabbar Gopang (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 13-AUG-13
Approved for Reporting


31) 1150/2011 Adm. Suit A.KHALID ANSARI (Plaintiff) V/S INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER CORPORATION & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 15-APR-15
Approved for Reporting


32) 173/2009 S.M.A Muhammad Javed .... Petitioner (Petitioner) V/S aaa (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 PLD Sindh 1
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 10-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


33) 109/1985 Civil Revision Ali Bux through his legal heirs & others (Applicant) V/S Mst. Bhagbhari through her legal heirs & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 25-MAR-11
Approved for Reporting


34) 780/2001 Suit Zafar Mahmood Khan (Plaintiff) V/S Muhammad Ali Khan and another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 13-MAY-15
Approved for Reporting


35) 4053/2016 Const. P. Syed Maqbool Hussain Zaidi (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) Note 14
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 03-JAN-18
Approved for Reporting


36) 34/2005 Cr.Appeal Muhammad Pali (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 12-FEB-15
Approved for Reporting


37) 628/2009 Suit ILYAS AHMED (Plaintiff) V/S MUHAMMAD MUNIR & ORS. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 17-NOV-11
Approved for Reporting


38) 248/2014 H.C.A Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Appellant) V/S M/s Friends Corporation Stevedores (Pvt.) Ltd. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 31-JUL-17
Approved for Reporting


39) 447/2008 Const. P. Ali Asghar Siddiqui (Petitioner) V/S M/s. Tyms Education Limited & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 12-APR-12
Approved for Reporting


40) 30/2009 Cr.Rev Haji Muhammad Usman. (Applicant) V/S Abdul Sattar and others. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 03-JUN-11
Approved for Reporting


41) 20/2009 Civil Revision Mst Rabia Khatoon (Applicant) V/S Abbas Ali and an other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 12-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


42) 2323/2014 Const. P. Muhammad Sultan (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh through Secretary Home Department & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


43) 819/2015 Const. P. Ghulam Murtaza (Petitioner) V/S Mst Khursheed Lubna & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2018 YLR 2003
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 27-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


44) 7077/2016 Const. P. Shahbaz Garment (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 22-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2873/2018,C.M.A.8722/2018,C.M.A.8723/2018,C.M.A.8724/2018,C.M.A.8725/2018,C.P.461-K/2019,C.P.462-K/2019,C.P.463-K/2019,C.P.464-K/2019,C.P.465-K/2019,C.P.466-K/2019,C.P.467-K/2019,C.P.468-K/2019,C.A.98-K/2019,C.A.99-K/2019,C.A.100-K/2019,C.A.101-K/2019,C.A.65-K/2019,C.A.102-K/2019,C.A.103-K/2019,C.A.104-K/2019,C.A.105-K/2019,C.A.106-K/2019,C.A.107-K/2019,C.A.108-K/2019,C.A.109-K/2019,C.A.110-K/2019,C.A.111-K/2019,C.A.112-K/2019,C.A.113-K/2019,C.A.114-K/2019,C.A.115-K/2019,C.A.117-K/2019,C.A.116-K/2019,C.P.469-K/2019,C.P.470-K/2019,C.P.471-K/2019,C.P.472-K/2019,C.P.473-K/2019,C.P.474-K/2019,C.P.475-K/2019,C.P.476-K/2019,C.P.477-K/2019,C.P.478-K/2019,C.P.479-K/2019,C.P.480-K/2019 SCP Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed


45) 1637/2013 Const. P. Dawood Singhar and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahnawaz Tariq, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 28-APR-15
Approved for Reporting


46) 152/2019 Spl.Anti.Ter.A. SYED MEHROZ MEHDI ZAIDI S/O SYED HASSAN MUHAMMAD (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 19-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


47) 3400/2012 Const. P. Sarfraz Ali (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Son Quota (Dismissed))
Tag Line:In the light of above discussion, it is crystal clear that Police Department cannot circumvent the law to make recruitment to the post of police constable on the basis of Son/Shaheed quota by issuing Standing Orders or by invoking Rule 11-A of Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1974 and Sindh Shaheed Recognition and Compensation Act, 2014. The appointment of police constable can only be made through competitive process on merit as provided under the recruitment rules and not otherwise. In view of what has been discussed above, the instant Constitutional Petition is dismissed along with pending application(s)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


48) 1316/2011 Suit KHAIR MUHAMMAD KHATIAN & OTHERS (Plaintiff) V/S LIAQUAT ALI G. KAZI & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 13-MAY-15
Approved for Reporting


49) 174/2010 Civil Revision Pakistan National Shipping Corporation (Applicant) V/S M/s. Seaward Surveyors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 MLD 24
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 06-AUG-14
Approved for Reporting


50) 2666/2020 Const. P. Saeed Habib (Petitioner) V/S National Bank of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:NBP--We are constrained to observe that despite the legal position established in view of plethora of pronouncements by the Hon???ble Supreme Court as discussed above, the present petitioner filed this petition seeking a relief to which he was not entitled under the law. In other words, the petitioner wanted this Court to grant a declaration contrary to the law settled by the Hon???ble Supreme Court. Not only this, he obtained an ad-interim injunction order in these proceedings against the respondent-bank. Such conduct on his part is not acceptable as he has consumed and wasted valuable time of this Court which could have been utilized to decide genuine and urgent matters. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed with costs.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 16-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.305/2021 Saeed Habib v. National Bank of Pakistan, Karachi Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


51) 4045/2012 Const. P. Taj Rani (Petitioner) V/S National Bank of Pakistan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Deceased Son Quota
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 11-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.70-K/2018 Mst: Taj Rani v. The President National Bank of Pakistan and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


52) 4662/2017 Const. P. M/s Quality Steel Re-Rolling (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:SRO 583(I)/2017 struck down.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 07-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


53) 2025/2008 Const. P. Syed Jarrar Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Prov. of Sindh &Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Amenity Plot (Conversion of amenity plot into Residential / commercial)
Citation:1990 PLD 504, 2000 SCMR 506, 2001 SCMR 683, 2006 SCMR 178, 2007 SCMR 287, 2008 SCMR 105, 2010 SCMR 1925, 2011 SCMR 279, 2015 SCMR 456, 1994 CLC 2214, 2006 CLC 342, 2008 CLC 573, 2014 CLC 965, 2015 PLC 719, 2005 YLR 2423, 1917 OTHER 56, 1957 OTHER 97, 1957 OTHER 311, 2010 OTHER 373
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 04-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


54) 365/2010 Cr.Acq.A. Nabi Bux S/o Vikio Machhi (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 09-MAY-11
Approved for Reporting


55) 6382/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Jibran Nasir & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Police case
Citation:2021 PLC (CS) Note 179
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 29-JAN-20
Approved for Reporting


56) 571/2016 Const. P. Muhammad Mateen Khan (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PLC (CS) 1
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 28-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.653-K/2018 Muhammad Mateen Khan v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


57) 167/2012 Suit Naseem-ul-Haq (Plaintiff) V/S Raees Aftab Ali Lashari & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 YLR 550
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 12-FEB-13
Approved for Reporting


58) 37/2014 H.C.A Syed Mumtaz Ali & others (Appellant) V/S Mst.Khatoon Begum (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar
Order Date: 07-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting


59) 162/2019 Criminal Appeal SHAHID WAHAB SIDDIQUI S/O ABDUL WAHAB (Appellant) V/S SYED FARHAJ AHMED & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 02-JUL-20
Approved for Reporting


60) 1463/2016 Cr.Bail Siraj Muhammad (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 YLR 99, 2016 OTHER 1559, 2017 SBLR 1433
Advocates:Inamullah(ADVO-11910-SBC-KHI),Babur Ishaq(ADVO-11008-SBC-KHI),Prosecutor General Sindh(PGS)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 14-NOV-16
Approved for Reporting


61) 6131/2017 Const. P. Dr. Moomal and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Chairman SPSC and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 01-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


62) 1704/2018 Const. P. Al-Razzaq Fibres & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sale Tax Act 1990 (Section 3)
Tag Line:WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 199 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, 1973 A Divisional Bench of this Court comprising of Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmed Khan has pronounced the judgment on 18th January 2021 in the case of Al-Razzaq Fibres Pvt. Ltd. and others v. The Federation of Pakistan and another (alongwith other connected Petitions), whereby, the petitioners have challenged the vires of the amendment in in subsection (2)(b) of Section 3 and Section 4(c) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 through Finance Act, 2017, to the extent of substituting the words ???Board with the approval of Federal Minister Incharge" as well as SRO 584(I)/2017 dated 01.07.2017, particularly adding of a new condition XIV to SRO 1125(I)/2011 for being ultra vires to the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Divisional Bench of this Court has been pleased to allow the aforesaid Petitions in the following terms: - "11.Accordingly, for the above reasons, instant petitions are allowed in the following terms:- (i) Amendment in Section 3(2)(b) read with Section 4(c) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, through Finance Act, 2017, to the extent of substituting the words " Board with the approval of Federal Minister Incharge", is ultravires to Constitution, and contrary to law, hence of no legal effect. (ii) SRO 584(I)/2017 dated 01.07.2017 issued in terms of and in purported exercise of powers conferred by, the amendment in Section 3(2)(b) and Section 4(c) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, particularly adding of a new condition XIV to SRO 1125(1)/2011, is declared to be ultra vires the Constitution, and is of no legal effect. (iii) The respondents are restrained from demanding any duty in terms of SRO 584(I)/2017 dated 01.07.2017 from the petitioners. (iv) Provisions of Section 74A, suffice to say, have no relevance to the controversy in hand because it seeks validation of the acts of "Federal Government???, and not that of the ???Board, with the approval of the Federal Minister-in-Charge"."
Citation:2021 PTCL 270
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 18-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.610-K/2021 The Commissioner Inland Revenue, Zone-I v. Al Razzaq Fibres (Pvt) Ltd & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


63) 882/2003 Const. P. Tanveer Hidayatullah Hashmi and another (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Fozia Naheed and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Ashraf Jehan
Order Date: 15-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting


64) 5920/2015 Const. P. Kainat Soomro and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of SIndh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Muhammad Vawda(ADVO-14001-SBC-KHI),Advocate General Sindh(ADVO-GEN-SBC-KHI),Prosecutor General Sindh(PGS)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 13-FEB-20
Approved for Reporting


65) 730/2012 Const. P. M/s. Muhammadi Builders (Pvt.) Ltd. (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 21-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


66) 5463/2013 Const. P. Zamir Iqbal Khan (Petitioner) V/S Provice of Sindh and ORs (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 SBLR Sindh 942
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 21-JAN-14
Approved for Reporting


67) 6241/2016 Const. P. Anjum Badar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Contract appointments)
Tag Line:petitioners have prayed that their temporary contractual appointments / services be regularized in BPS-17 under Section 3 of The Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013---Whether temporary employees appointed on contract in BS 16 and above can be deemed to have been validly appointed on regular basis, without going through the competitive process of selection through the Sindh Public Service Commission, merely in view of Section 3 of the Act of 2013 ?--Whether the mandatory requirement of competitive process of selection only through the Sindh Public Service Commission for appointments in BS 16 and above, which is the command of the Constitution and specific direction to the Government of Sindh by the Hon???ble Supreme Court, can be waived, relaxed, done away with, exempted and or bypassed in view of Section 3 of the Act of 2013 ?--Whether the petitioners have any vested right for regular appointment, or to claim regularization, or to approach this Court in its constitutional jurisdiction to seek redressal of their grievance relating to regularization ; and, is there any corresponding legal duty cast on the Government of Sindh to appoint them on regular basis ? If no, then can a writ of mandamus to this effect be issued against the Government of Sindh ? --Whether Section 3 of the Act of 2013, to the extent of regularization / appointment in BS 16, 17 and 18 without the mandatory competitive process of selection through the Sindh Public Service Commission, is ultra vires the Constitution and against the law laid down and the direction given by the Hon???ble Supreme Court to the Government of Sindh in Ali Azhar Khan Baloch and others V/S Province of Sindh and others, 2015 SCMR 456.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 08-APR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.735-K/2021 Anjum Badar v. The Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary & others,C.A.28-K/2021 Anjum Badar v. The Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary & others,C.A.27-K/2021 Tariq Ali & others v. Province of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted [ C.As be fixed after three months ],Pending ,Pending


68) 1250/2016 Const. P. Dawood Baloch (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Saleem & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Saleem Jessar
Order Date: 23-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


69) 1285/2010 Const. P. Safdar Ali Sahito (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 19-OCT-10
Approved for Reporting


70) 416/2011 Suit GHULAM NABI SHAH (Plaintiff) V/S PIAC & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 PLC CS 768
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 07-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


71) 261/2018 Spl.Anti.Ter.A. SIKANDAR ALI LASHARI S/O ALI MUHAMMAD (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Decision/Judgment in the appeals filed by Sikandar Ali Lashari (District Judge) against the conviction of death penalty decided by A.T.C. on the charge of murder of Aqib Hussain son of District & Sessions Judge.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 20-APR-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:J.P.294/2020 Muhammad Irfan Khan @ Faheem v. The State,Crl.P.592/2020 Sikandar Ali Lashari v. The State thr. PG Sindh Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending ,Pending


72) 708/2011 Adm. Suit Mohammad Ibrahim Tunio (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 24-JAN-12
Approved for Reporting


73) 71/2008 Suit.B SONERI BANK LTD (Plaintiff) V/S CLASSIC DENIM MILLS PVT LTD (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 04-JUN-12
Approved for Reporting


74) 2070/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Yaqoob (Petitioner) V/S Province Of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2019 YLR 1507
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 02-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


75) 836/2012 Suit KHURRAM NASEEMUDDIN (Plaintiff) V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Declaration and Permanent Injunction)
Tag Line:Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss.42, 54, 56 (d) & (e)---Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974 (VIII of 1975), S.5---Suit for declaration and injunction---Criminal investigation---Refusal of injunction---Plaintiff assailed notices issued by Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to Habib Bank Limited in furtherance of inquiry that certain immovable properties of someone had been fraudulently offered by two persons to various banks for obtaining loans against said properties in favour of plaintiff???s company---Validity---Defendants were officers of FIA established under Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974 and were fully competent to inquire into fraud committed by different persons in obtaining loans from banking institutions---One of the defendants was posted in commercial banks??? circle and it was within the purview of his duty to inquire into and investigate complaint registered, numbered and marked to him in terms of S.5 of Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974---Remedy was quashment, if made out and not simple declaration and decree prohibiting public functionaries from performing their duties within the four corners of law---Suit was dismissed in circumstances. Mian Hamza Shahbaz Sharif v. Federation of Pakistan and others 1999 PCr.LJ 1584; Messrs K.G. Traders and others v. Deputy Collector of Customs and 4 others PLD 1997 Kar. 541; Assistant Director Intelligence and Investigation, Karachi v. Messrs B.R. Herman and others PLD 1992 SC 485; Shahzad Ahmed Corporation v. Federation of Pakistan and others 2005 PTD 23 and 2005 PTD (Trib) 135 distinguished.
Citation:2014 PLD 264
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 21-NOV-13
Approved for Reporting


76) 1952/2014 Const. P. Syed Ali Ammar Jafry and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.424-K/2019 Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited and another v. Syed Ali Ammaar Jafrey and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


77) 1513/2009 Suit M/S.RABBIYA ASSOICATES (Plaintiff) V/S M/S.ZONG CHINA MOBILE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 15-DEC-10
Approved for Reporting


78) 2865/2013 Const. P. Rashid Latif (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 27-NOV-13
Approved for Reporting


79) 878/2014 Const. P. Jaffar Ali (Petitioner) V/S SHO Airport PS Latifabad Hyd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 25-FEB-15
Approved for Reporting


80) 2069/2011 Const. P. Ayaz Ali and others (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Service matters (Deceased quota)
Tag Line:since the delay in appointment cannot be attributed to the petitioner No.1, as such the notification dated 17-07-2009 being adversely affecting the petitioner No.1 cannot be applied retrospectively, as prior to issuance of such Notification; the petitioner No.1 had already acquired a vested right and was entitled to be governed by the Notifications dated 02-09-2002 and 11-03-2008 read with letter dated 13.12.2008 issued by S&GAD. On the basis of these observations, the petitioner No.1 is entitled to be appointed under the deceased quota, after fulfillment of requisite codal formalities as otherwise required under the said policy
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 23-APR-14
Approved for Reporting


81) 500/2006 Suit DELHI MERCANTILE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD (Plaintiff) V/S REGISTRRA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES SINDH & (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 25-MAY-11
Approved for Reporting


82) 111/2004 H.C.A Muhammad Aslam V/S M/s.Colony Sarhad Textile Mills Ltd (Appellant) V/S Muhammad Aslam V/S M/s.Colony Sarhad Textile Mills Ltd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Athar Saeed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 24-MAR-11
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.158-K/2011 Muhammad Aslam v. M/s Colony Sarhad Textile Mills limited Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


83) 938/2017 Suit Farrukh Afzal Munif (Plaintiff) V/S Muhammad Afzal Munif & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 SBLR Sindh 31
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 28-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


84) 293/2020 Cr.Bail Muhammad Yaseen (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 17-AUG-20
Approved for Reporting


85) 47/2013 H.C.A Haroon Zia Malik (Appellant) V/S Mst. Fariha Razzak and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Plaintiff was owner of suit property who voluntarily gifted the same to the donee-wife---Trial Court had correctly appraised the evidence while recording his findings---Impugned gift deed was not a forged and fabricated document but same had been signed by the donor---Suit property had been gifted in favour of defendant who was wife of donor at the relevant time---Ingredients of gift were offer, acceptance and delivery of possession which were present in the case---Possession of suit property was already with the donee which till date continued to be with her---If husband had made a gift of anything to his wife or vice-versa then it could not be retracted---Transaction in question was not a financial one but it was gift of which a reciprocal financial obligation was not a consideration---Provisions of Arts. 17 & 79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 were not applicable in the matter of gift---Gift did not require a compulsory registration---Donor did not suffer any mental distress at the hand of donee---Impugned judgment did not suffer from any infirmity or illegality---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.
Topic: H.C.A (Revocation of Gift)
Tag Line:Plaintiff was owner of suit property who voluntarily gifted the same to the donee-wife---Trial Court had correctly appraised the evidence while recording his findings---Impugned gift deed was not a forged and fabricated document but same had been signed by the donor---Suit property had been gifted in favour of defendant who was wife of donor at the relevant time---Ingredients of gift were offer, acceptance and delivery of possession which were present in the case---Possession of suit property was already with the donee which till date continued to be with her---If husband had made a gift of anything to his wife or vice-versa then it could not be retracted---Transaction in question was not a financial one but it was gift of which a reciprocal financial obligation was not a consideration---Provisions of Arts. 17 & 79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 were not applicable in the matter of gift---Gift did not require a compulsory registration---Donor did not suffer any mental distress at the hand of donee---Impugned judgment did not suffer from any infirmity or illegality---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.
Citation:2018 YLR 1557
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 21-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.96/2018 Haroon Zia Malik v. Mst. Fariha Razzak and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


86) 102/2013 Cr.Appeal Abdul Qadir alilas Fauji (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar
Order Date: 17-MAR-16
Approved for Reporting


87) 7114/2016 Const. P. Asifa Jawed (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PLC (CS) 326
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 07-AUG-19
Approved for Reporting


88) 1072/2015 Suit Delhi Mercantile Muslim Co-operative Housing Society (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 02-SEP-16
Approved for Reporting


89) 2955/2017 Const. P. Syed Faisaluddin (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 30-AUG-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.556-K/2019 Syed Faisal Uddin v. Federation of Pakistan and others,C.A.44-K/2020 Syed Faisal Uddin v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secretary M/o. Interior and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted/ to be fixed at Islamabad after 3 months,Pending


90) 5/2017 Spl.H.C.A Syed Wajahat Hussain Zaidi & another (Appellant) V/S United Bank Ltd. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 CLD 91
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 24-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


91) 1413/2014 Cr.Bail SHAH JAHAN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 SBLR Sindh 796
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 09-SEP-14
Approved for Reporting


92) 73/2015 Const. P. Rafiq Haji Usmani (Petitioner) V/S The Chairman NAB and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 02-MAR-15
Approved for Reporting


93) 916/2015 Const. P. Khawaja Muhammad Salman (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Saeed-ud-Din Nasir, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 04-SEP-15
Approved for Reporting


94) 0/2020 Suit Damen Shipyards Gorinchem B.V. (Plaintiff) V/S The Ministry of Maritime Affairs and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Application for conditional withdrawal of Suit Order 23 Rule 1 CPC dismissed as plaintiff wanted permission to allow prosecution of Constitution Petition filed on the same cause of action after urgency was declined due to current pandemic in this Suit. Plaintiff had filed petition without first withdrawing the Suit, and had instead sought permission post-facto. such conduct cannot be permitted as it amounts to Bench-hunting.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 18-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting


95) 566/2013 Suit Tariq Rafi. (Plaintiff) V/S Topgen Health Care/T.G. Pharma & Ors. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 CLC Note 39
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 27-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


96) 1179/2017 Const. P. Mohammad Anwar (Petitioner) V/S Fed:of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 06-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


97) 6554/2019 Const. P. Ms. Urooj Fatima (Petitioner) V/S PM & DC and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:(a) The repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was by virtue of Article 89(2)(a)(ii) of the Constitution, i.e., by a resolution of the Senate disapproving the same and not by way of any repealing enactment. Therefore, the effect of repeal contained in sections 6, 6-A and section 24 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which otherwise apply only when a repeal is by way of a repealing enactment, were neither triggered nor would those serve as an aid in construing the effect of repeal under a Constitutional provision such as Article 89. In other words, on the repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 by the effect of Article 89 of the Constitution, nothing contained in the General Clauses Act, 1897 would come to save the Amending Admission Regulations that had been made under the repealed Ordinance. In view of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council v. Muhammad Fahad Malik (supra), Article 264 of the Constitution also did not have the effect of saving or giving permanency to the Amended Admission Regulations when the effect of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was only temporary as it was never accorded approval by the Parliament. Therefore, on 29-08-2019, when the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was repealed by the effect of Article 89 of the Constitution, the Amended Admission Regulations also stood repealed and the Original Admission Regulations were revived. (b) It will be seen that while the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 50 of the PMC Ordinance, 2019 repeals all previous Regulations, but that is subject to sub-section (7) which provides that the previous Regulations will continue to apply to the on-going admission process. The repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 1962 by the PMC Ordinance, 2019, the former being a permanent statute under the 1973 Constitution, is not a repeal by virtue of Article 89 of the Constitution, but a repeal by a repealing statute, albeit a temporary one, and one which has been expressly made subject to section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which in turn provides that ???the repeal shall not revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect???. We have already discussed above that on 29-08-2019 the Amended Admission Regulations had ceased and the Original Admission Regulations had revived. Therefore, when sub-section (7) of section 50 of the PMC Ordinance, 2019 provides that the previous Regulations will continue to apply to the on-going admission process, those can only be the Original Admission Regulations.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 14-NOV-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4221/2019 Pakistan Medical & Dental Council thr. its Secretary, Islamabad v. Ms. Urooj Fatima & others,C.A.610/2020 Pakistan Medical & Dental Council now Pakistan Medical Commission thr. its Secretary, Islamabad v. Ms. Urooj Fatima & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Pending


98) 74/1991 Suit Mohammad Sarwar (Plaintiff) V/S Government of Sindh and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Suit for recovery of compensation amount--Deceased died in the custody of police officials---Contention of the police was that deceased died due to cardiac arrest---Validity---None of the police officials entered the witness box to defend the claim against them---Written statement filed by the police officials had lost its evidentiary value as contents whereof were never proved in the evidence---Deceased died while he was in the custody of police officials---Plaintiff was to prove the factum of incident only---Burden would shift on the police officials to disprove the causation if they wanted to succeed in the claim against the plaintiff---Present case did fall within the purview of Fatal Accidents Act, 1855---Prosecution in a criminal case was to prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of accused but in civil proceedings the matter had to be decided on the basis of preponderance of probabilities---Acquittal of (private) defendants in the criminal case did not have any adverse bearing on the present lis---Police official were liable to compensate the plaintiff by applying the rule of vicarious liability--- Claim of plaintiff with regard to quantum of damages was also unchallenged---Life expectancy of seventy five years in plaintiff's family had been proved---Deceased might also have lived for another fifty years approximately---Claim of awarding damages of Rs.50,00,000/- was justified---Master/employer in the claims with regard to tortuous liabilities would be liable for the wrongful acts of his employees/servants---Provincial Government and Inspector General of Police were liable to compensate the plaintiff besides other defendants---Defendants (Police officials) were liable to pay the damages/compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- together with 10% markup from the date of institution of suit till realization of the amount to the plaintiff and his wife i.e. parent of the deceased jointly and severally. Suit decreed.
Topic: Tort Law, Civil Procedure Code CPC (Compensation.)
Tag Line:Custodial death, suit for recovery of compensation amount decreed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 23-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting


99) 194/2010 Cr.Bail Muhammad Shoaib (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 03-APR-10
Approved for Reporting


100) 433/2000 Suit MRS. SHABINA AZIZ (Plaintiff) V/S STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORP. OF PAKISTAN (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order XIII Rule 4 CPC)
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XVI, R. 1(2)---Limitation Act (IX of 1908) S.3---Summoning and attendance of witnesses---Object, scope and nature of O.XVI R.1, C.P.C.---List of witnesses, non-filing of---Provisions of O.XVI, R.1, C.P.C. were mandatory---Use of the word "shall" in O.XVI, R.1(1), C.P.C. was re-emphasized with a prohibition that the party "shall not" be permitted to call witnesses other than those in the said list except with the permission of the court on showing "good cause" for the omission of said witnesses from the list---Time limit was an essential requirement of O.XVI, R.1, C.P.C. for seeking any relief with respect to summoning and attendance of court witnesses---Limitation of seven days was imposed so that the other side should be well aware of possible evidence expected in the case to meet it in rebuttal---Such limitation, if was allowed to be flouted with impunity, then the parties would keep on surprising each other by introducing witnesses and documents in evidence---After seven days from the time of framing of issues, upon failure to file list of witnesses, a statutory right was accrued in favour of opposite party which was; that even if evidence was available with a party such evidence shall not be used by the party having such evidence in their possession---Said right was analogized to the right of parties under S.3 of the Limitation Act, 1908---Rights survived but the remedy was extinguished---Evidence may be available but its effect was barred seven days after framing of issues by the court---Not only the "good cause" had to be shown by the delinquent party for calling a witness through the court but at the same time the applicant was required to explain the delay in disclosing the name of the witness---Failure of party to explain such delay would disentitle such party from getting relief and it would be against the spirit of the law to causally condone the time limit given in O.XVI, R.1, C.P.C. in the name of doing justice on merit. Muhammad Umar Mirza v. Waris Iqbal and others 1990 SCMR 964; 2008 YLR 1871 and 2008 CLC 1334 rel. (b) Administration of Justice--- ----Submission of irrelevant case-law by counsel appearing in court---Complaint of overwork in the judiciary was one of the basic obstacles in the administration of justice and it was not for the courts alone to administer justice and ensure that justice was not denied on account of inordinate delay in the disposal of cases---Each and every lawyer appearing in court had an equal responsibility to ensure that they should not consume the time of the court out of proportion to the issue in hand on the date of hearing---Very valuable time of the court can be consumed in the reading of case-law submitted by counsel and if such case-law was not relevant, it was one of the major contributing factor in the delay of administration of justice----Counsel were expected to be brief and to the point to help save time of the courts which in turn would utilized by the courts in disposal of other cases particularly the old cases.
Citation:2014 CLC 420
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 10-OCT-13
Approved for Reporting


101) 102/2012 Civil Revision Chaudhry Manzoor Ahmed & another (Plaintiff) V/S Faisal Manzoor & other (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 30-MAR-15
Approved for Reporting


102) 308/2011 Cr.Misc. Yasmin Gul Khanani and another (Applicant) V/S Tariq Mehmood (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 18-JUL-13
Approved for Reporting


103) 3913/2020 Const. P. Abdul Ghaffar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:i) Whether the petitioner possesses the required qualifications for the post of police Constable (BS-05) in Sindh Police as per recruitment Rules-2016 ? And ii) Whether police Constable (BS-05) in Sindh Police can be recruited on a contract basis and subsequently be regularized in service under the law?
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 14-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.5160/2021 Abdul Ghafar and others v. Province of Sindh through Home Secretary and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Barred by Time


104) 161/2014 Cr.Rev SIP Ahmed Saeed Shaikh and others (Applicant) V/S Muhammad Bakhsh and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 02-JAN-15
Approved for Reporting


105) 2268/2017 Const. P. Attaullah Khan Chandio (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Promotion), Service matters (Seniority)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1157
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-JAN-18
Approved for Reporting


106) 444/2019 Const. P. Aam Loeg Ittehad & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Election Commission of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Constitution of Pakistan (199), Election Matters
Tag Line:A Divisional Bench of this Court comprising of Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan, has pronounced the judgment on 12.06.2020 filed by Aam Log Ittehad, through its Secretary General Azhar Jamil and Mr. Wajihuddin Ahmed (former Judge of Hon?ble Supreme Court of Pakistan) in his capacity as Human Rights and Political Activist, challenging the appointment of respondents No.2 to 5, Justice (Retired) Shakeel Ahmed Baloch, former Judge, Balochistan High Court; (ii) Justice (Retired) Irshad Qaiser, former Judge, Peshawar High Court; (iii) Justice (Retired) Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi, former Judge Lahore High Court; & (iv) Abdul Ghaffar, a former bureaucrat, who according to petitioners, have been appointed in violation of Article 207 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, which provides that "a person who has held office as a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court shall not hold any office of profit in the service of Pakistan, not being a judicial or quasi-judicial office or the office of Chief Election Commissioner or of Chairman or member of a law commission or of Chairman or member of the Council of Islamic Ideology, before the expiration of two years after he has ceased to hold that office". This being a case of first impression on the subject constitutional and legal points has been decided through this detailed judgment by Hon?ble Bench in the following terms: "22. We would, therefore, sum up our findings on various constitutional and legal grounds agitated by the petitioners and the objections as to maintainability of instant petition raised by the respondents, in the following terms: (i) Petitioners have the locus standi to file instant constitutional petition in the nature of quo-warranto under Article 199(i)(b)(ii) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 for the reason that any person, who may not be an aggrieved party, can invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of a High Court for issuance of a writ of quo-warranto so that a High Court may examine the validity of an appointment to a public office, on constitutional and legal grounds. In view of our detailed finding as recorded in Para: 9 to 12 hereinabove, the objections raised by the respondents with regard to maintainability of instant petition on various grounds, including: (i) locus standi of petitioners to file instant petition; (ii) mala fide on the part of the petitioners; (iii) latches; and (iv) lack of territorial jurisdiction of this Court, are hereby declared to be without any substance, hence over-ruled. ii) Office of Election Commission of Pakistan is a "quasi-judicial office", therefore, bar of expiration of two years in terms of Article 207(2) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, would not be attracted in the case of appointment of retired judges of Supreme Court and High Court(s). Therefore, a writ of quo-warranto cannot be issued against respondents Nos. 2 to 4 being the retired Judges of different High Courts on the grounds that their appointments have been made before expiration of two years from the date when they ceased to hold office as Judges of High Courts. Accordingly, writ against respondents Nos.2 to 4 is misconceived and not maintainable. iii) As regards issuance of writ of quo-warranto against respondent No.5, a retired bureaucrat, no substantial constitutional or legal ground has been agitated, nor any sufficient material or evidence has been produced in support of the allegations of corruption, therefore, we are not inclined to conduct any inquiry or to make a probe into the allegations levelled against respondent No.5 while exercising constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199(i)(b)(ii) of the Constitution in the instant case. Accordingly, writ against respondent No.5 is not maintainable.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 12-JUN-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.479-K/2020 Aam Loeg Itehad & others v. The Election Commission of Pakistan & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Judgment Reserved Judgment Reserved - Marking to Honble Mr. Justice Maqbool Baqar


107) 144/2009 Cr.Rev Mrs. Ghazala Parveen (Applicant) V/S Sadiq Daniel & 18 others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 08-DEC-11
Approved for Reporting


108) 2396/2012 Const. P. Mir Muhammad Raza Talpur (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar
Order Date: 17-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.1374/2017,C.A.1380/2017,C.P.108-K/2017,C.P.290/2017 SCP Status:Disposed ,Disposed ,Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed,Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed


109) 1085/2013 Const. P. Syed Muhammad Abbas Rizvi & Others (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 SBLR Sindh 145
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahnawaz Tariq, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 30-OCT-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.336-K/2014 Muhammad Abbas Rizvi and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others,C.A.1343/2014 Muhammad Abbas Rizvi and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted. (C.A. be fixed on 06.11.14),Disposed Dismissed


110) 4371/2020 Const. P. Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P. No.D-4371 of 2020 filed by Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin against Government of Sindh (vehicle number plats petition). The petition has been dismissed.
Advocates:Sarosh Jameel(ADVO-18157-SBC-KHS),Mohammad Maaz Waheed(ADVO-16053-SBC-KHE),Muhammad Osman Ali Hadi(ADVO-11058-SBC-KHI),Advocate General Sindh(ADVO-GEN-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 29-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1464-K/2021 Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin & another v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


111) 4235/2012 Const. P. Mehar Ali Dayo (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 01-NOV-13
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.694-K/2013 Mehr Ali Dayo v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


112) 3309/2011 Const. P. M/S Ibrahim Fibres Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Prov. of Sindh and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Infrastructure fee / cess levied vide Sindh Finance Act, 2017 applicable retrospectively w.e.f. 01.07.1994 is intra vires; all petitions stand dismissed to that effect; however, Insofar as the first four versions of law introduced through Sindh Finance Act, 1994, amended through Sindh Finance Act, 1996, the Sindh Finance (Amendment) Ordinance, 2001, and the Sindh Finance (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2001 are concerned, their applicability on the petitioners who had litigated earlier and were Appellants in Sanofi Aventis(PLD 2009 Karachi 65), has attained finality and is a past and closed transaction, notwithstanding promulgation of its fifth version vide Sindh Finance (Amendment) Ordinance, 2006, further amended by The Sindh Finance (Amendment) Act, 2007 (Sindh Act No: II of 2007, and The Sindh Finance (Amendment) Act, 2009 (Sindh Act No: III of 2009);
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 04-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4321/2021 M/s Ibrahim Fibres Ltd Karachi v. The Province of Sindh, through the Secretary Excise & Texation Department, Sindh, Karachi and others,C.P.1544-K/2021 M/s. Artistic Fabric Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Province of Sindh through the Secretary Finance Department & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Allowed, Leave Granted and Impugned Judgment suspended.,Pending


113) 7382/2019 Const. P. Akhtar Hussain and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:issuance of offer/appointment orders to the post of Gavi Vaccinators (BPS-6) in the Health Department on the plea that they have already been declared successful candidates based on marks they obtained in the competitive process --i) Whether the recruitment process for the post of vaccinator (BPS-6) was flawed under the law? ii) Whether the Selection Committee was lawfully constituted; and, the Provincial Minister was competent to reduce the passing marks and facilitate private respondents/beneficiaries for appointment to the posts of vaccinators (BPS-6)? iii) Whether some of the private respondents/beneficiaries on the recommendation of the two-member Selection Committee were lawfully appointed as vaccinators in BPS-6? iv) Whether the petitioners can claim a right to be appointed through the two-member Selection Committee to the posts of vaccinators (BPS-6)?--
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3111/2021 Ghayasuddin Shahani and others v. Akhtar Hussain and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


114) 2415/2016 Suit Saleem Butt (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan and Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Given the mechanism in-built in section 177 of the Income Tax Ordinance, which includes the providing of reasons in writing to the taxpayer, the power conferred on the Commissioner to call for record under section 177(1) of the Ordinance, does not by itself offend Article 25 of the Constitution. The question then, whether such power has been used unlawfully, is different, and one that may vary with the circumstances of each case. While making such challenge, the Plaintiff had also to demonstrate infringement of a Fundamental Right. The invoking of section 177(1) does not militate against the concept of deemed assessment under section 122 of the Ordinance. Malafides had to be pleaded with particulars.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


115) 128/2011 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Collector Model Customs Hyderabad (Applicant) V/S M/s Khuda Raheem & anothe (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 16-DEC-11
Approved for Reporting


116) 461/2011 Cr.Bail Muhammad Arshad (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 18-JAN-12
Approved for Reporting


117) 677/2015 Suit The Kathiawar Co-operative Housing Society & another (Plaintiff) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 08-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


118) 4930/2015 Const. P. Musheer Ahmed and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1278
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 27-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.263-K/2020 Province of Sindh and others v. Musheer Ahmed and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


119) 6629/2018 Const. P. Imran Khan Sahito (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aziz-ur-Rehman, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 08-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2008/2019 Ahmed Nawaz Jagirani v. Imran Khan Sahito & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed


120) 2939/2011 Const. P. Dr. Ashfaq Ahmed Tunio & others (Petitioner) V/S Federal Investigation Agency & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 SBLR Sindh 1
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 28-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


121) 59/2016 Civil Revision Dr. Bhagwandas & Others (Applicant) V/S Mashooq Ali Jatoi & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Citation:2019 CLC Note 58
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 18-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


122) 101/2015 Adm. Suit Muhammad Saeed (Appellant) V/S Muhammad Baqir Bukhari (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 24-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting


123) 327/1966 Suit Raza Hussain and others (Plaintiff) V/S Muhammad Khan and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Compromise on behalf of defendants---Scope---Transferee of property could not confer upon a transferor a better title than he himself possessed---Defendants had no lawful authority, right or interest at the relevant time in the subject property when they entered into a compromise with the plaintiffs---Neither any appeal was preferred against the partition order nor authenticity or validity of the same was challenged by any of the parties---Possession of suit property was wrongly handed over to the plaintiffs by the Nazir of the Court---Nazir of the Court was directed to take appropriate measures to hand over the possession of suit land to its claimants.
Topic: Specific Performance (Compromise, Direction. )
Tag Line:Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell. Directions to the Nazir to handover the possession of suit land to its claimants.
Citation:2018 YLR 1053
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 15-AUG-17
Approved for Reporting


124) 5025/2020 Const. P. Aameer Mustaaly Karachiwalla (Petitioner) V/S Deputy Commissioner I.R and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 199 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, 1973 A Divisional Bench of this Court comprising of Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Justice Mrs. Rashida Asad has pronounced the judgment on 22nd December 2020 in the case of Aameer Mustaaly Karachiwalla v. Deputy Commissioner Inland Revenue and others (alongwith other connected Petitions), whereby, the petitioners have challenged the issuance of notice under Section 182(2) read with Section 116A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, enforcing penalty for not submitting returns regarding Foreign Income and Assets Statement. The plea of the petitioners was that the petitioners have already declared Foreign Income and Assets from all the sources in their wealth statement filed under Section 116 alongwith their return of total income for the Tax Year 2019 under Section 114 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, within the prescribed time limit, by availing e-filing facility via IRIS, whereas, such return was duly accepted, as no notice was issued to the petitioners by the Department in terms of Section 120(3) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, requiring the petitioners to furnish any short documents in this regard. It was further argued on behalf of the petitioners that omission in filing returns was neither deliberate nor it has any financial implications or involvement of payment of any taxes, etc. therefore, the penalty provisions of Section 182 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, could not be invoked. Learned Divisional Bench of this Court by examining all the relevant provisions of law and case-laws has been pleased to allow the aforesaid Petitions in the following terms: - "13. In view of the foregoing discussions, we are of considered opinion that in the absence of prescribed format notified under Section 116A of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, whereas, nothing has been concealed by petitioners, nor there is any consequence either on income or tax liability of petitioners for non-filing of Foreign Income & Assets Statement along with return of income for Tax Year 2019, the penal provisions of Section 182 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, could not be invoked. Particularly, when respondents have failed to establish willful default or mens rea on the part of petitioners. We derive analogical guidance from ???the Non delegation Doctrine??? which is well established in jurisprudence and is attracted in the instant circumstances. Issuance of notices under section 182(2) cannot be validated, therefore, impugned notices having no support of lawful authority are hereby declared as illegal, hence, of no legal consequence. For these reasons, the petitions were allowed vide short order announced on 22.12.2020.
Citation:2021 PTD 335
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Rashida Asad(Author)
Order Date: 22-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.742/2021 Commissioner Inland Revenue AEOI, Karachi and others v. Aameer Mustaaly Karachiwalla Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


125) 1575/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Akram Thr. M Anwer Khan (Petitioner) V/S Shri Mahant Baboo Lalgir Mahraj & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Rent Matters), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (FRA Remanding Order Set aside and declared null & void. )
Tag Line:Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----Ss. 15, 18, 20 & 21---Ejectment of tenant---Change of ownership on the basis of decree of the Court---Denial of relationship of landlord and tenant by the tenant---Default in payment of rent---Expression "or by such other mode" in S. 18 of the Ordinance---Scope---Dispute of title or ownership---Determination of---Procedure---Landlord became owner of demised premises through decree of the Court and tenant was intimated with regard to change of ownership and was requested for payment of rent to the new landlord---Tenant denied the relationship of landlord and tenant---Eviction petition was allowed by the Rent Controller on the ground of default in payment of rent---Appellate Court remanded the matter to the Rent Controller with the direction to decide the same afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties and directed the civil Court to amend the decree passed in the civil suit---Contention of tenant was that decree of the Court did not create any title---Validity---Tenants were in possession on the demised premises as tenants and they were not claiming ownership---Notice for change of ownership of demised premises had been received by the tenants---Tenants were bound to tender rent to the new owner of the demised premises within 30 days from the moment they had received the intimation of transfer of ownership by sale, gift, inheritance "or by such other mode"---Notice from new owner to the tenant for change of ownership was enough---Tenants on receiving the said notice refused to tender rent to the new owner on the ground that the decree of Court did not create any title---Decree of Court could also be one of the "such other mode" for transfer of ownership of demised premises---Decree of Court was against previous landlord/owners who were party to the suit in which same was passed---Tenant had no right to question the title of landlord---Tenants on receiving notice of change of ownership were supposed to protect their right as tenant in the demised premises in their possession by tendering rent to the person who had sent them the notice---Tenants had failed to tender rent to the new owner of demised premises---Courts while exercising authority under the law had no jurisdiction to decide or even comment on the title/ownership of the property in possession of tenant---If issue of relationship of landlord and tenant was complex then it should be left for the Civil Court to decide the same---Appellate authority in the present case had remanded the matter to the Rent Controller with the direction to decide the issue of relationship between the tenant and new landlord by re-examining the issue of ownership/title of demised premises already decided by the Civil Court---Judgment of Civil Court could not be examined by the Rent Controller---Appellate Court had exercised powers not vested in it and order for modification/preparation of fresh decree and remand of the case was perverse and void---Impugned order passed by the Appellate Court was set aide and order for preparation of fresh decree and remand of rent case were declared null and void---Tenants were directed by the High Court to vacate the demised premises within thirty days---Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly. Messrs Habib Bank Limited v. Sultan Ahmed and another 2001 SCMR 679 and Allahditta and others v. Member (Federal) Board of Revenue 2018 SCMR 1177 rel.
Citation:2019 CLC Note 25
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 20-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.95-K/2019 Evacuee Trust Property Board (ETPB) thr. Administrator v. Shri Mahant Baboo Lalgir and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed


126) 84/2012 Cr.Appeal Abdul Qadir (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 09-JUN-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.A.37-K/2014 The State (ANF) v. Abdul Qadir,Crl.P.90-K/2014 The State (ANF) v. Abdul Qadir Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Leave Granted


127) 96/2017 Cr.Appeal Ghulam Muhammad Mazari and Others (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito
Order Date: 01-JUN-18
Approved for Reporting


128) 843/2015 Suit Aroma Travel Services (Pvt) Ltd., & Others. (Plaintiff) V/S Faisal Al Abdullah Al Faisal Al Saud & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 PLD Sindh 414
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 30-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting


129) 240/2014 Const. P. Sikandar Ali Lashari (Petitioner) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shaukat Ali Memon, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 26-JUN-15
Approved for Reporting


130) 575/2009 Const. P. Dr.Jalil Qadir (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 27-APR-10
Approved for Reporting


131) 6221/2015 Const. P. Rab Nawaz (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Appointment)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) Note 5
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 30-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.675-K/2017 Rab Nawaz v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


132) 22/2010 Cr.Appeal Syed Naveed Ali (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 03-OCT-12
Approved for Reporting


133) 1914/2020 Const. P. Amir Akbar Khan (Petitioner) V/S NAB & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Applicability of the regime of sections 204 and 91 Cr.P.C. to a Reference under the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi
Order Date: 26-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


134) 575/2008 Const. P. Naseeruddin & another (Petitioner) V/S Syed Daulat Ali & ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 10-JUL-14
Approved for Reporting


135) 1254/2015 Suit Mrs Naveen Irfan (Plaintiff) V/S Mst Shama Parveen (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 03-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


136) 6572/2016 Const. P. Sultan Ahmed Shaikh (Petitioner) V/S M/s Sui Southerm Gas Co. & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Promotion case
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


137) 31/2011 Cr.J.A Dhani Bux s/o Bagh Lakhiar (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 07-DEC-10
Approved for Reporting


138) 618/2012 Const. P. Nasrullah Domki (Petitioner) V/S SHO PS Saddar Jacobabad and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Tag Line:Nasrullah Const.p: Petitions No. S- 618 of 2012.S-65, 74, 79, 134, 164, 226, 284, 337, 697, 814,834, 845, 932 and 1079 of 2015.
Citation:2016 PLD 238
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 14-OCT-15
Approved for Reporting


139) 165/2016 H.C.A Dr. Farzana (Appellant) V/S Syed Shahrukh Abbas (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:In Person(INP)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 10-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting


140) 5577/2016 Const. P. Agha Fahad Ahmed Khan (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 27-SEP-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3440/2017 Agha Fahad Ahmed Khan v. Province of Sindh, thr. Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh, Karachi & others,C.A.1592/2017 Agha Fahad Ahmed Khan v. Province of Sindh, thr. Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed,Disposed


141) 1656/2016 Const. P. Arham Khan and Ors (Petitioner) V/S M.D KW & SB and Oters (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 19-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting


142) 272/2020 Cr.Bail ABDULLAH S/O MEHMOOD RAZA & ANOTHER (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 MLD 267
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Mobeen Lakho(Author)
Order Date: 13-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


143) 288/2013 Const. P. Syed Sajid Abbas Rizivi (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Naureen and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 25-APR-13
Approved for Reporting


144) 916/2018 Const. P. Sub-Engineer / Staff Welfare Association (Petitioner) V/S GOS & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 09-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting


145) 813/2020 Const. P. Usman Hamid Thr. Attorney Muhammad Adnan Hamid (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Sundus Wahid and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 01-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


146) 6198/2014 Const. P. K-Electric Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Registrar of Trade Union and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 15-JAN-18
Approved for Reporting


147) 1009/2015 Suit M/s. Century Paper & Board Mills Limited. (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 SBLR Sindh 1269
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 26-OCT-16
Approved for Reporting


148) 601/2017 Const. P. Kashif Hussain Gaad (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Saleem Jessar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 13-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


149) 920/2017 Suit Mst. Hajani Sherbano (Plaintiff) V/S Qazi Muhammad Fareed & Ors (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order VII R.11), Order Vii, Rule 11 C.P.C
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 24-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


150) 868/2019 Const. P. Muzammil Mumtaz Meo (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Legislation on manufacture sale and use of gutka, mainpuri and mawa etc
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi
Order Date: 03-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


151) 994/2020 Const. P. M/s. Guidance Schooling System Thr. M. Ashraf (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Seema Mohsin and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Rent matter-- In view of the above, no illegality is found to have been committed by both courts below. Writ of certiorari against the order passed in rent jurisdiction can be exercised only if the order is beyond the jurisdiction or patently illegal, which is not the present case. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed in limine along with listed applications with no order as to costs.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


152) 2798/2014 Const. P. Arham Aziz Shaikh (Petitioner) V/S Province Of Sindh and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Appointment)
Citation:2018 PLC (CS) Note 121
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 09-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


153) 84/2016 Const. P. Mst. Samina Pathan (Petitioner) V/S National Database and Registration Authority [NADRA] (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Dismissal from service in undue haste and in violation of statutory service rules, can be assailed in a writ jurisdiction.
Topic: Constitution of Pakistan (199)
Tag Line:Dismissal from service in undue haste and in violation of statutory service rules, can be assailed in a writ jurisdiction.
Citation:2018 PLC Lab. 36
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 17-MAY-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2857/2016 National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) thr. its Chairman, Islamabad & others v. Samina Pathan & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted


154) 551/2017 Suit Muhammad Saeed (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 PLD 622
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 21-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting


155) 1847/2017 Const. P. Yasin Ali Baloch and Ors (Petitioner) V/S The Administrative Sect: STEVTA and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 16-APR-18
Approved for Reporting


156) 4291/2015 Const. P. Syeda Sakina Riaz (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Back benefits)
Citation:2018 SCMR 1272
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 13-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.1189/2017 Syeda Sakina Riaz v. Federation of Pakistan and another,C.P.343-K/2017 Syeda Sakina Riaz v. Federation of Pakistan and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Leave Granted. Relist after 3 months


157) 4677/2013 Const. P. Dr. Naeem Memon (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and ORs (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Whether supersession is punishment---in promotion matters to such post could not be made in a mechanical manner and a variety of factors, such as examination of service records, evaluation reports of training institutions, record of disciplinary proceedings, reputation of integrity and efficiency, suitability for handling particular assignment, etc. had to be taken into consideration--- NCA Employees Service Rules 2011, on the aforesaid proposition, the matter has been set at rest by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Shafique Ahmed Khan and others v. NESCOM through Chairman Islamabad and others (PLD 2016 SC 377)] therefore, question of declaring the Chapter II of the NCA Employees Service Rules 2011 as ultra vires of Section 9, 11 of the National Command Authority Act 2010 and Articles 4,9,10-A of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 are not apropos at this stage for the reason discussed in the preceding paragraphs.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 18-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting


158) 44/2010 H.C.A Saeed Qureshi V/S Mrs.Surriya Afzal & Ors. (Appellant) V/S Saeed Qureshi V/S Mrs.Surriya Afzal & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Athar Saeed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 28-FEB-11
Approved for Reporting


159) 60/2014 First Appeal Against Order Arif Oasman (Appellant) V/S Habib Bnk Limited (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 26-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


160) 8633/2017 Const. P. Ghulam Ali Bhatia (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973
Tag Line:WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 199 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, 1973. A Divisional Bench of this Court comprising of Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan, has pronounced the judgment on 09.10.2020 in the case of Ghulam Ali Bhatia & others v. Federation of Pakistan & others (along with connected petitions), whereby, the petitioners have expressed their grievance against impugned amendment in SRO 583/2017 dated 01.07.2017, for being discriminatory, as according to petitioners, the concession and reduction in payment of duty and taxes to the Ship Breaking Industry in respect of re-rollable and re-meltable scrap is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, whereas, a declaration has been sought to the effect that petitioners, who are the importers and manufacturers of re-rollable and re-meltable scrap, may be given the similar concession/reduction in tax liability as according to the petitioners, they fall within the same class of persons. The aforesaid petitions have been dismissed by the Divisional Bench of this Court while holding that petitioners, who are importers of re-rollable and re-meltable scrap are covered under PCT Heading 7204.4910, whereas, ship (vessel) imported by the Ship Breaking Industry are covered under PCT Heading 8909.0000, hence cannot be treated at par. It has been further held that through impugned amendment, reduction of tax liability has been granted as an incentive for the revival of ship breaking industry pursuant to policy decision, whereas, there seems no legal impropriety in the impugned amendment. No additional liability or burden has been created through impugned amendment, in violation of constitutional provisions or the law, therefore, the allegation of discrimination amongst the same class of person is otherwise misconceived. Reliance has been placed in the case of Messrs Elahi Cotton Mills Ltd. and others vs. Federation of Pakistan and others (PLD 1997 SC 582), wherein, it has been held as under:- "(vi) That the tests of the vice of discrimination in a taxing law are less rigorous. If there is equality and uniformity within each group founded on intelligible differentia having a rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved by the law, the Constitutional mandate that a law should not be discriminatory is fulfilled."
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan
Order Date: 09-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


161) 858/2016 Const. P. Irshad Ali and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 15-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


162) 834/2016 Cr.Bail ABDUL GHAFFAR S/O SHAMSUDDIN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan
Order Date: 04-JUL-16
Approved for Reporting


163) 5220/2017 Const. P. Sami Pharmaceuticals (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Province Of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Tag line Dispute regarding value of supply of services of labor and manpower under heading 9829.0000; Held, that under Sindh Sales Tax Act 2011 read with Rule 42(E) of Sindh Sales Tax Rules 2011 such value does not include the amount of salary and wages reimbursed by the recipient of the service and tax is payable only on the service charges component.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 02-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


164) 1482/1998 Suit Abdul Wahid (Plaintiff) V/S Deedar Ali Issran (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Specific Performance (Suit Dismissed. )
Tag Line:Sale Deed registered in favour of defendants are valid documents and have been entered by the authorized Attorney (having registered sub-irrevocable general power of attorney which is in pursuance of earlier registered irrevocable general power of attorney given by the legal heirs to one of legal heirs) of the plaintiffs. Suit dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 29-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting


165) 4612/2018 Const. P. M/S Saiban International (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 07-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting


166) 3693/2011 Adm. Suit Mohammad Khan Jalbani (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 31-MAR-15
Approved for Reporting


167) 876/2007 Suit Mustafa H. Jivanjee (Plaintiff) V/S The Director General Karachi Development Authority (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 06-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


168) 527/2018 Const. P. Agha Shoaib Abbas and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 11-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1421-K/2018 Agha Shoaib Abbas and others v. The Province of Sindh and others,C.P.140-K/2021 Agha Shohaib Abbas & others v. The Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed,Pending


169) 210/2017 Cr.Misc. muhammad anwar qureshi (Applicant) V/S muhammad ayoob & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2019 YLR 839
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 20-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


170) 76/2015 Civil Revision Fozia Rahat (Applicant) V/S Masood Ahmed & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order 1 Rule 10 CPC)
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. I, R. 10 & O. XLI, R. 20 & S. 96---Suit for declaration---Appeal---Impleadment of party as co-appellant---Amendment of appeal---Effect---Applicants filed application for impleadment in the appeal which application was accepted and they were impleaded as co-appellants---Validity---Party could be impleaded at any stage even in appeal as appeal was continuation of suit---Applicants could be impleaded in appeal if they had bona fide interest in the result of appeal---Applicants were to be allowed to join as respondents in the appeal and not as appellants---If applicants were aggrieved by the order impugned in appeal then they could file an appeal even if they were not party to the suit subject to law of limitation---Applicants, in the present case, were not necessary party in whose absence an effective judgment in appeal could not be delivered by the Appellate Court---Neither there was any order to amend the appeal by the newly added co-appellants nor an appeal could be amended suo motu or at the will of appellants---Amended appeal was to be considered from the date of its presentation---Decree impugned in the appeal was not even binding on the applicants as they were not party to the suit---High Court observed that purpose for filing of application for impleadment was to delay the decision of appeal on merits---Impugned order passed by the Appellate Court was set aside---Appellate Court was directed to decide the appeal on merits within one month---Revision was allowed, in circumstances.
Citation:2019 CLC 1323
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 10-JAN-19
Approved for Reporting


171) 642/2003 Suit M/S.SILVER FLOUR MIOLLS. (Plaintiff) V/S K.E.S.C (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 YLR Note 258
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 01-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


172) 5608/2014 Const. P. Mansoor ul Haq Solangi (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Back benefits)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-APR-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.859-K/2016 Pakistan Automobile Corporation Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan thr.Secy: M/o Industries and Production and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


173) 4747/2016 Const. P. Rukhsana Yahya (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 18-OCT-16
Approved for Reporting


174) 1511/2005 Const. P. K.E.S.C Labour Union and others (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 199 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, 1973 1. A Divisional Bench of this Court comprising of Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan has pronounced the judgment today i.e. on 21st January 2021 in the case of K.E.S.C. Labour Union and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others (alongwith other connected Petitions), whereby, the petitioners have challenged the privatization process adopted by the Respondents Nos.2 and 3 i.e. Privatization Commission through its Secretary and Karachi Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. through its Managing Director in respect of sale/transfer of the shares of KESC for being illegal, irrational and without lawful authority. Whereas, further declaration has been sought to the effect that purported sale and transfer of shareholding and management control in KESC to M/s.Hassan Associates consortium, is void, malafide and opposed to law and public policy. Various other Constitutional and legal grounds were agitated during the course of hearing of above Petitions and after hearing all the learned counsel for the parties, in detail, learned Divisional Bench of this Court through an exhaustive judgment pronounced today has been pleased to dismiss the above Petitions in the following terms: - "62. In view of hereinabove facts and circumstances of the case, the aforesaid petitions are disposed of in the following terms:- a) The privatization process adopted by the respondents No.2 & 3 in respect of sale/transfer of the share of KESC does not violate the constitutional mandate, whereas, substantial compliance of the provisions of Privatization Commission Ordinance, 2000 read with Privatization Commission (Modes and Procedures) Rules, 2001, has also been made, therefore, no interference is required by this Court. Accordingly, aforesaid Constitutional Petitions being devoid of any merit, are hereby dismissed along with listed applications. b) That without prejudice to above finding, we hereby declare that the petitioners have failed to establish the malafide on the part of respondents in respect of sale/transfer of the share to KESC through negotiated sale to a private company, which is otherwise permissible in law and as per rules referred to hereinabove, therefore, the allegation of malafide by the petitioners on the part of the respondents stands rebutted, hence petitions are dismissed on this ground also. c) Nothing has been produced by the learned counsel for the petitioners in support of their submission that electricity being an essential service cannot be privatized, therefore, such plea of the petitioners also stands rebutted and the petitions are hereby dismissed on this account also." 2. Before parting with the aforesaid judgment, learned Divisional Bench of this Court has been further pleased to observe that plea of the learned counsel for the petitioners requiring the Court to take cognizance of subsequent events of privatization, issue directions to the Auditor General of Pakistan for conducting scrutiny and audit of the accounts of the K-Electric (KESC), cannot be acceded in these Petitions, as it would amount to granting a relief to the petitioners beyond the pleadings, while changing the complexion of the proceedings, to the disadvantage of the respondents, which is not permissible in law. However, it has been observed that this aspect of the matter can be agitated as a separate cause before the relevant forum/authority/Court of law, by filing appropriate proceedings, however, subject to all just exceptions and in accordance with law.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 21-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.482-K/2021 KESC Labour Union through its Chairman & another v. Federation of Pakistan Through the Cabinet Secretary & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


175) 636/2012 Suit Mari Gas Company Ltd (Plaintiff) V/S Byco Petroleum Pakistan Ltd. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 PLD Sindh 314
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 25-MAR-13
Approved for Reporting


176) 5396/2014 Const. P. Naeem Akhtar Chang (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Dy Attorney General(DAG),Deputy Attorney General(),Zamir Hussain Ghumro(ADVO-10861-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 11-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting


177) 1502/2008 Adm. Suit Mr. Nazar Akbar, Advocate for the Plaintiff. (Plaintiff) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 01-OCT-10
Approved for Reporting


178) 2694/2019 Const. P. Human Resources Solution (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 27-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


179) 323/2009 Cr.Misc. Haji Muhammad Zakria Seth (Applicant) V/S The State & 2 others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 25-FEB-10
Approved for Reporting


180) 4422/2017 Const. P. Syed Irtaza Raza Naqvi (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 19-JAN-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.68-K/2018 Sui Southern Gas Company Limited v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


181) 8265/2017 Const. P. Majid Akhtar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Seniority)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 771
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 21-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.135/2018 Ali Bux Shaikh v. Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secretary and others,C.A.636/2019 Ali Bux Shaikh v. Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secretary and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed,Disposed


182) 649/2013 Const. P. Mst. Sahib Khatoon (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Service matters (Contempt )
Tag Line:Petitioner being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the non -action by the alleged Contemnors, filed an Application (CMA 14152/2015)under Article 204 of the Constitution, praying therein to initiate the Contempt Proceedings against the alleged Contemnors. The alleged Contemnors have filed statements showing compliance of the order dated 10.9.2015, passed by this Court with the assertion that they offered the post of Balder in BS-1 to the son of the Petitioner, Contempt Proceedings is always between the Court and the alleged Contemnor, thus its scope cannot be enlarged. the post of Field Assistant under Rule-10-A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant , for the simple reason that the aforesaid post can only be filled as per recruitment Rules. The explanation offered by the Respondents vide (CMA 14152/2015),prima facie, is tenable under the law as the Petitioner???s son was offered the post of Beldar in BS-1 by the Respondents in compliance of order dated 10.9.2015 passed by this Court; but the same was refused by the Petitioner???s son. we are satisfied with the explanation offered by the alleged Contemnors that substantial compliance of the order dated10.9.2015 passed by this Court has been made in its letter and spirit, therefore at this juncture, no case for initiating Contempt Proceedings is made out against the alleged Contemnors. Thus, we are not minded to proceed with any further on the listed application searing , having no merits, are accordingly dismissed.
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1408
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 22-JAN-19
Approved for Reporting


183) 2753/2009 Const. P. M/S Shahbaz Garments Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan and others (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab
Order Date: 01-MAR-13
Approved for Reporting


184) 71/1994 Const. P. Gul Ahmed Textile Mills (Petitioner) V/S Collector of Customs & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, Constitution of Pakistan (199)
Tag Line:Constitutional petition is maintainable even if Federation or Province not impleaded as respondent.
Citation:2019 PLD Sindh 144
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 19-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


185) 3969/2011 Const. P. Mst. Rukhsana (Petitioner) V/S Prov. of Sindh and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 20-SEP-12
Approved for Reporting


186) 6/2008 Suit.B Transmission Engineering Industries Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 03-DEC-13
Approved for Reporting


187) 100/2013 Cr.J.A Abdul Aziz Bhatti (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito(Author)
Order Date: 17-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


188) 8261/2019 Const. P. Attaullah Arbab (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Repatriation from the post of Additional Deputy Commissioner-I, Hyderabad to his parent department i.e. Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd. vide Notification dated 12.2.2016 issued by Chief Secretary--whether the petitioner was qualified to be inducted from Sui Southern Gas Company in Sindh Government on deputation for three years' And, whether the Chief Minister, Sindh was competent to nominate the petitioner as Assistant Commissioner in Ex-PCS cadre under the Rule 5(4) (b) of the West Pakistan Civil Service (Executive Branch) Rules, 1964? and, whether his repatriation to his parent department is in accord with the direction given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court?--It is well-settled law that a deputationist does not have any vested right to remain on the post as deputationist forever or for a stipulated period. He can be repatriated to his parent department at any time. The Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Shafiur Rehman Afridi v. CDA, 2010 SCMR 378, has settled the issue on the aforesaid proposition. Therefore, no further deliberation is required by us--In our view, since the direction of the Honorable Supreme Court in the aforesaid matters is still in the field, we are bound to follow it under the Constitution. Besides the respondents have issued the impugned notification in pursuance of the orders passed by the Honorable Supreme Court in the aforesaid proceedings, therefore, no indulgence of this Court is required in the present matter--Dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 23-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


189) 82/2018 R.A (Civil Revision) Arthur Lawerance Private Limited (Applicant) V/S M/S Actlaw (The Legal Consortium) (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Order Vii, Rule 11 C.P.C
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----Ss. 115, 6 & 15 & O. VII, R. 10---Revision before High Court---Procedure---Revision, in the present case, was filed before High Court without availing remedy before District Judge---Validity---Power of High Court with regard to the cases decided by any Court subordinate to High Court in which no appeal lay was not subject to any limitation---Revisional power of District Court was dependent on its pecuniary jurisdiction---Revisional power of Court was unfettered when it was exercised by the High Court and/ or District Court suo motu---When such jurisdiction had been invoked then copies of all the proceedings should have been furnished and revision should have been filed within ninety days from the date of order in which no appeal lay---Revisional powers of High Court and District Court were concurrent only when it was exercised by said courts at their own---Pecuniary value of claim of petitioner, in the present case, did not exceed the limits of appellate jurisdiction of District Court---If suit had been dismissed or decreed by the Trial Court on merit then first appeal would lie before District Judge on account of pecuniary value of the decretal amount---When revisional jurisdiction had been invoked against a particular order then it would not be a case of concurrent jurisdiction and mandatory provisions of S.6 read with Ss.15 to 20 of C.P.C. were also be considered---Aggrieved party had no option in the matter of jurisdiction of Court and it should respect each and every word of statute with regard to the jurisdiction---Every suit was to be instituted in the Court of lowest grade---Provisions of Ss.6 & 15 of C.P.C. were to be complied with while filing revision/appeal---Revision/appeal could not be filed in the High Court unless pecuniary value of the subject matter did exceed the appellate jurisdiction of District Court---When case had been filed in a Court which had no jurisdiction on pecuniary ground then plaint/revision should be returned to the party to file it in the Court having both territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction within limitation prescribed for filing the same---Petitioner had consumed more than ninety days time to overcome objection raised by the office---Revision petition could not be presented in the Court of District Judge after expiry of ninety days which was dismissed, in circumstances. Muhammad Din v. Muhammad Amin PLD 1995 Lah. 15 and Mst. Safia Mushtaq v. Wali Muhammad and 18 others 2010 CLC 120 distinguished. Khalid Ahmed and another v. Syed Hassan Shah Bukhari and others 1994 MLD 903; HOECHST Pakistan Limited and others v. Maqbool Ahmed and another 1998 CLC 134 and Shafi-ur-Rehman and 2 others v. Fateh Muhammad PLD 2002 Kar. 511 rel. (b) Appeal--- ----Appeal/revision was a continuation of original suit. (c) Interpretation of statutes--- ----Court could not interpret one section of an Act which might render the other mandatory provision of the said Act meaningless.
Citation:2020 PLD Sindh 129
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 05-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2380/2019 Arthur Lawrence (Pvt) Ltd, Karachi v. M/s Actlaw, Karachi Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


190) 85/2020 Suit Touqeer Ahmed (Plaintiff) V/S Muhammad Younus Lakhani & others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 09-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


191) 510/2020 Cr.Bail Syed Zaman Ali Shah (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Topic: Bail Matters
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 22-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


192) 15/2012 H.C.A Securities & Exchange Commission of Pakistan (Appellant) V/S Adnan Faisal & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 PLD Sindh 235, 2019 CLD 242
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 02-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting


193) 22/2003 Suit.B M/S.AZMAT TRADING CO. (Plaintiff) V/S NDLC IFIC BANK (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 21-MAY-13
Approved for Reporting


194) 247/2010 Suit Maula Bux Khatian (Plaintiff) V/S The Sui Southern Gas Company Limited & others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 24-SEP-14
Approved for Reporting


195) 740/2018 Const. P. DR. Mazhar Ali Hisbani (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sind & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 03-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


196) 3954/2015 Const. P. Syed Ishtiaque Ahmed Hashmi (Petitioner) V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 07-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.887-K/2018 Syed Ishitiaque Ahmed Hashmi v. Province of Sindh thr. its Director General and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


197) 158/2010 I.T.R.A Commissioner (Legal) V/S M/S EFU General Insurance Ltd (Applicant) V/S Commissioner (Legal) V/S M/S EFU General Insurance Ltd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Athar Saeed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 06-JUN-11
Approved for Reporting


198) 555/2012 Cr.Bail Hazoor Bux Brohi and another (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 08-FEB-13
Approved for Reporting


199) 5079/2013 Const. P. Syed Farhat Iqbal and 11 others (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 01-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.411-K/2017 M/s State Oil Company Ltd. v. Syed Farhat Iqbal and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


200) 3310/2018 Const. P. Muhammad Asad ul Rehman (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:the petitioners are seeking regularization of their services against the quota reserved for deceased civil servants as provided under the Prime Minister???s Assistance Package for the Families of Government Employees, on the premise that their parents were serving in the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) on different posts, who passed away during their service.
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 30-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


201) 132/2020 Cr.Acq.A. Abdul Qayoom (Appellant) V/S Raja Khoso (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Saleem Jessar(Author)
Order Date: 05-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


202) 97/2007 Cr.J.A Kouro Shar and others (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Ahmed Ali M. Shaikh, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 18-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:J.P.365/2012 Kouro & others v. The State Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


203) 2136/2012 Const. P. Hassan Jameel Ansari (Petitioner) V/S NAB & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 18-JUL-12
Approved for Reporting


204) 84/2011 Execution M/s. NIB Bank Ltd (Decree Holder) V/S Apollo Textile Mills Ltd & others (Judgment Debtor)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 PLD Sindh 430
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 02-APR-13
Approved for Reporting


205) 30/2020 Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. Fatima Fertilizer Company Limited (Applicant) V/S Commissioner-II SRB (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Person liable to tax.
Citation:2021 PTD 484, 2021 TAX 122
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 22-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.705/2021 Commissioner-II, Sindh Revenue Board, Karachi v. Fatima Fertilizer Company Limited, Lahore Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned on adj application.


206) 304/2016 Cr.Appeal JAHANZEB S/O MUHAMMAD ASLAM (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah
Order Date: 07-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


207) 905/2017 Const. P. M/s MCB (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 05-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2612/2019 MCB Bank Ltd, Lahore v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Zulfiqar Hussain Awan, Director (Legal-II), Office of Consultant Legal Affairs to the President of Pakistan, Islamabad & others,C.A.533/2020 MCB Bank Ltd, Lahore v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Zulfiqar Hussain Awan, Director (Legal-II), Office of Consultant Legal Affairs to the President of Pakistan, Islamabad & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted.to be fixed after 4 weeks a/w C.As.1386/2018 etc,Pending


208) 1753/2012 Const. P. Muhammad Iqbal (Applicant) V/S Mst.Zahida and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 15-FEB-13
Approved for Reporting


209) 1699/2010 Suit ABBAS ALI (Plaintiff) V/S ASIF ABBAS & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 01-AUG-12
Approved for Reporting


210) 329/2020 Suit Danish Akhtar & others. (Plaintiff) V/S Directorate of Estate Projects & others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 YLR 64
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 11-JUN-20
Approved for Reporting


211) 166/2019 H.C.A Najmul Hassan & ors (Appellant) V/S Romana Qamar & ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 01-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1357-K/2020 Najmul Hassan & others v. Romana Qamar & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


212) 2112/2015 Const. P. China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 23-SEP-15
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.2475/2016 Chief Commissioner Inland Revenue and another v. China Harbour Engineering and others,C.P.604-K/2015 Chief Commissioner Inland Revenue and another v. China Harbour Engineering and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending ,Disposed Leave Granted


213) 286/2003 Suit SYED WAQAR HAIDER ZAIDI (Plaintiff) V/S MST.ALAM ARA (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 CLC 535
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 07-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


214) 2/2017 Cr.Rev Party-1 (Applicant) V/S Party-2 (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 18-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


215) 1016/2013 Const. P. Nadeem Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aziz-ur-Rehman, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 21-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


216) 360/2016 Cr.Appeal SAIFULLAH S/O BABAR ALI SHAH (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah
Order Date: 21-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


217) 291/2016 Cr.Appeal Mangat Hussain Butt (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Ashraf Jehan
Order Date: 06-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


218) 47/1997 Civil Revision Shabbir Khan & Ors. (Appellant) V/S Haji Abdul Latif Khan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Civil Revision, Case remanded. )
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----Ss. 151, 96, 10 & 11 & O. XLI, R. 27---Appeal---Inherent powers under S.151, C.P.C. exercised by the Appellate Court---Scope---Respondent moved an application under S.151, C.P.C. claiming res judicata against the suit---Appellate Court remanded the case while exercising powers under S.151, C.P.C.---Validity---Respondent raised a factual issue before the Appellate Court through application under S.151, C.P.C. which was not raised before the Trial Court---Powers of civil court under S.151, C.P.C. had certain restrictions in application of the same could not be equated with the powers of a court of original civil jurisdiction---Provisions of Civil Procedure Code which empowered courts of original civil jurisdiction while dealing with civil suits like provisions of Ss.10 & 11, C.P.C. were not available to the appellate court while exercising authority in terms of S.96, C.P.C.---Appellate Court had not given reference to the findings of the Trial Court while deciding the appeal and had exercised the powers of a court of original civil jurisdiction which were not vested in it---Exercise of power under S.151, C.P.C. by the Appellate Court was improper and uncalled for---Trial Court had not discussed the issue of res judicata in its judgment---Issue which was not taken up and decided by the Trial Court was not supposed to be examined by the Appellate Court---Issue of res judicata ought to have been raised first before the Trial Court for its decision and not at the appellate stage for the first time--Question of res judicata was a question of fact and parties had to first allege it and then prove it through evidence---Appellate Court was not supposed to examine a new/fresh defence (plea of res judicata) at appellate stage---If appeal was time barred then Appellate Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the same and remand the suit---Appellate Court had exercised the jurisdiction not vested in it---Impugned judgment and decree were set aside and appeal was remanded for decision afresh---Appellate Court was directed to first examine the question of limitation for filing the appeal before proceeding further in the matter---Revision was disposed of in circumstances. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 11---Res judicata---Power of appellate Court---Scope---Question of res judicata was a question of fact and parties had to first allege it and then prove it through evidence---Appellate Court was not supposed to examine a new/fresh defence (plea of res judicata) at appellate stage. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 151---Inherent power---Scope---Civil court was not supposed to resort to the inherent powers in presence of a specific provision available in C.P.C. to deal with a particular situation. (d) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---High Court had suo motu power to examine the correctness, legality and propriety of an order passed by the subordinate court at any time and if subordinate court had improperly exercised its jurisdiction and/ or exercised jurisdiction not vested in it then High Court could set aside the said order.
Citation:2016 CLC 1790
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 29-MAR-16
Approved for Reporting


219) 836/2019 Const. P. Sardar Muhammad Bux Mahar Thr. Tasawar Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Saman Muhammad Mahar and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Guardian and Ward Act, 1890 (Section 7, 8 and 25)
Tag Line:The natural guardians/mother and father of minors are not required to seek declaration of their guardianship through the Court. The Court under Section 7 of the Guardian and Ward Act, 1890 is not empowered to decide title of guardian about custody of the ward.
Citation:2020 PCr.LJ 1079
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 16-AUG-19
Approved for Reporting


220) 253/2015 Const. P. Faraz Sherwani and ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Promotion)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1084
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 24-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.70-K/2019 Ali Muhammad Joyo v. Asif and another,C.A.1000/2020 Chairman National Accountability Bureau thr. Prosecutor General Accountability, NAB Headquarter, Islamabad v. Faraz Sherwani and others,C.P.2215/2020 Chairman National Accountability Bureau thr. Prosecutor General Accountability, NAB Headquarter, Islamabad v. Faraz Sherwani and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned,Judgment Reserved Judgment Reserved.there is also a short court order by HCJ,Disposed Leave Granted.impugned judgement is suspended.to be heard a/w C.A.816/2020 out of C.P.1771/20 after 3 months.


221) 136/2014 Cr.Appeal Basar & others (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 13-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


222) 270/2012 Cr.Bail Mumtaz Ali Lashari (Applicant) V/S The state (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 16-NOV-12
Approved for Reporting


223) 1808/2016 Suit Mst. Bilqis Bano & another. (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan Defence Housing Authority & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 17-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


224) 13/2018 Civil Revision Manzar Alam (Applicant) V/S Malik Muhammad Yamin & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2019 YLR 598
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 01-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


225) 513/2019 Const. P. Muhammasd Rashid Bhatti (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.440-K/2019 Muhammad Rashid Bhatti v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secy: M/o Interior and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


226) 152/2010 Const. P. Abdul Sattar and others (Appellant) V/S Prov. of Sindh and others (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 19-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


227) 654/2010 I.T.R.A Commissioner (legal) (Applicant) V/S M/s Habib Metropolitan Bank (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 02-DEC-11
Approved for Reporting


228) 823/2008 Suit Abdul Karim (Plaintiff) V/S Bilal Atiq & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Declaration and Permanent Injunction)
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VII, R. 2---Money suit---Plaintiff filed suit claiming his charge on the suit property---All the transactions with regard to the suit property by and on behalf of defendant were dubious, mala fide, illegal and contrary to law---Buyer could not have better title than the seller---Plaintiff was entitled of decree to the tune of amount as equivalent to market value of the property on the date of filing of suit---Suit was decreed with specific directions. (b) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)--- ----S. 54---"Sale"---Scope---Mere sale agreement was not enough for transfer of title of immovable property---Transfer of title of immovable property must be through "registered instrument" and not merely by registered power of attorney to act on behalf of owner---"Sale" had to be proved independently by payment of full and final sale consideration---Sale would be incomplete until and unless a full and final sale consideration was paid and receipt thereof was issued separately by the seller. Sarfraz Ahmed and 36 others v. Mst. Sakina Ahmed and 36 others PLD 1985 Journal 121 and Mst. Hussain and 5 others v. Mst. Channo Bi 1990 CLC 1591 rel. (c) Stamp Act (II of 1899)--- ----S. 3---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S.17(b)---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.54---Sale of immovable property through power of attorney---Requirements---Power of attorney was liable to be "duly stamped" with stamp duty to confer power to "sell" on attorney with whom seller had also entered into an agreement of sale---Amount of stamp duty on such power of attorney should be equal to the stamp duty required for registration of "conveyance deed". (d) Stamp Act (II of 1899)--- ----Preamble---Scope---Stamp Act, 1899 was purely fiscal statute and violation of the provisions of Stamp Act, 1899 would entail penal consequence---Compliance of the Act was must for protection of revenue.
Citation:2015 CLC 1451
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 15-APR-15
Approved for Reporting


229) 1021/2014 Suit Muhammad Ali Zubair. (Plaintiff) V/S Sabira Khatoon & another. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Specific Performance (Specific Performance ), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Specific Performance)
Tag Line:(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXIII, R. 3 & O. VII, R. 11---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Compromise---Cause of action---Power-of-attorney---Rejection of plaint---Scope---Executant of power of attorney died prior to the execution of agreement to sell---Effect---Agreement was not validly entered into by and between the parties after the death of principal---Said agreement to sell was not enforceable at law even if contesting parties were ready and willing to abide by its terms---Sub-attorney who claimed to have entered into an agreement of sell with the attorney had not invited objections on entering into agreement of sale of suit property---Even (present) plaintiff after entering into agreement of sale with the sub-attorney had not issued any public notice in newspapers for inviting any objection from public-at-large for transfer of title of suit property---Had such effort been made, legal heirs of the deceased executant of power-of-attorney could have warned the plaintiff before making any further payment of suit property---Search certificate of suit property was not obtained from the office of Sub-Registrar of the properties concerned---Defendant had already breached promise with the plaintiff---Broken promise by the compromising parties could not be endorsed by the court---Application for compromise of suit was liable to be dismissed---No cause of action existed for filing of suit against the defendant---Cause of action shown in the plaint was a false and collusive statement of plaintiff and defendant---Plaintiff had attempted to obtain a compromise decree from the court---Defendant had never refused to perform her part of contract---When cause of action had ceased to exist, provisions of O. VII, R. 11, C.P.C. would attract and plaint was liable to be rejected---Suit for specific performance was liable to be rejected once defendant had conceded that he was ready and willing to perform his part of contract---Nazir of the court could not be allowed to perform part of contract under circumstances---Suit had become infructuous and plaint was liable to be rejected---Both the suit and compromise application were dismissed with cost of Rs. 100,000/- to be jointly and severally borne by the plaintiff and defendant---Said cost should be paid within specified period and if the same was not paid, Nazir of the court should take step for recovery of cost including attachment of movable and immovable properties of plaintiff and defendant---Member Inspection Team of High Court was directed to examine the record and if any criminal case was made out, he should initiate or cause to initiate criminal proceedings against plaintiff and defendant in accordance with law. Diamond Rubber Mills v. Pakistan Television Corporation Ltd. and 2 others 1989 CLC 1989 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VII, R. 11---Rejection of plaint---Scope---Jurisdiction of civil court to exercise its authority to adjudicate between the parties would co-exist with the "cause of action" to settle the grievance of plaintiff against the defendant on his/her denial to accept/acknowledge certain rights of plaintiff---No suit could be filed without a "cause of action" and if at all such suit was filed, plaint should be rejected for want of cause of action---If cause of action had ceased to continue after filing of suit, nothing was left for the court to exercise its authority.
Citation:2017 YLR 138
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 12-JAN-15
Approved for Reporting


230) 436/1993 Suit SHAHIMAH SAYEED (Plaintiff) V/S BASE CDR PAF BASE MASROOR (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 26-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


231) 2941/2016 Const. P. Muhammad Ayub Fazlani (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi
Order Date: 11-NOV-16
Approved for Reporting


232) 42/2020 Suit Syed Zain Ul Abideen (Plaintiff) V/S Federal Board of Revenue & others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Ouster of jurisdiction to try a civil suit in respect of matters arising under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 2017 and exceptions to such ouster.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 16-APR-20
Approved for Reporting


233) 4674/2018 Const. P. Pakistan Services Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Full Bench NIRC & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:(i) Whether Petitioner-PSL has locus standi to approach this Court as an aggrieved party under Article 199 of the Constitution against the decisions of NIRC? (ii) Whether petitioner-PSL is a Trans-Provincial Organization and falls within the ambit of National Industrial Relations Act, 2012? (iii) Whether or not the registration of industry-wise trade unions by the Registrar, Trade Union NIRC, Islamabad is violative of the mandatory requirement of Section 8 of Act, 2012, based on strength of workforce; and, liable to be canceled, in view of mandate of Section 11 of the IRA-2012? (iv) Whether the registrar of trade unions and/or NIRC is competent to determine the registration of the respondent unions?
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 27-APR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3497/2021 Pakistan Services Limitd, Islamabad through Director v. Full Bench of National Industrial Relations Commission, comprising three embers at Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


234) 3299/2016 Const. P. Bacho Leghari (Petitioner) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro
Order Date: 24-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


235) 52/2011 Cr.Rev Abdul Hameed (Applicant) V/S P.O Sindh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 14-JUN-12
Approved for Reporting


236) 1141/2019 Cr.Bail Kashif Dars S/o Muhammad Usman Dars (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Bail Matters ( under Section 498 Cr.P.C r/w Section 561-A Cr.P.C), Criminal Procedure Code
Tag Line:a) S.498, 561-A Cr.P.C--- Scope: Application of proper procedure; S.498, 561-A Cr.P.C--- Order under S.497(5) Cr.P.C passed by the District & Sessions Judge cancelling the bail of accused charged under Cyber Crime was assailed before High Court---The Court observed that the proceedings filed were half criminal bail application and half criminal Miscellaneous Application. It was further observed that surprisingly the Counsel who was protecting the liberty of his client was unaware of the law and nature of proceedings. As the proceeding under both the provision are distinguished in nature, in fact Deputy Registrar Judicial had to check that whether the instant application under Section 498 Cr.P.C was in the prescribed format for such an application or not. And if it was not the Deputy Registrar should have raised objection to bring it in the proper form. b) Supreme Court.16, 20, 21, PECA 2016 r/w 49, 420, 109 PPC (Prevention of Electric Crimes Act) --- S.497(5) Cr.P.C???Order: In fact in Cyber Crime the accused cannot allege malafide in associating/ connecting him in the crime. The complainant was not aware of the applicant. He had only noticed certain fake pages on internet and Facebook carrying objectionable. FIA by using scientific technics reached to the accused through cell phone number which has been used to the Facebook carrying offensive material. Held--- Since the complainant party was never aware of the person behind this misuse of internet, it cannot be said that complainant had malafidely named the accused and arrested or associated with the offence. The Cell phone was in use of Accused and sufficient documentary evidence appeared against him connecting him with commission of offence. Application dismissed.
Citation:2020 PCr.LJ 259
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 16-AUG-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.171-K/2019 Kashif Dars v. The State and others,Crl.A.397/2019 Kashif Dars v. The State and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed,Disposed


237) 279/2007 Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. Collector of Sales Tax and Fderal Excise (Applicant) V/S M/s. Abbott Laboratorie (Pakitan) Ltd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 09-DEC-09
Approved for Reporting


238) 232/2014 Cr.Misc. Azhar Ahmed Batla (Applicant) V/S M/s. I.G.I. Finex Securities Limited and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Ashraf Jehan
Order Date: 28-NOV-14
Approved for Reporting


239) 1399/2018 Cr.Bail FAHAD PAREKH S/O MUHAMMAD IQBAL (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 02-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting


240) 1458/2011 Suit NAJMUDDIN ZIA & ANOTHERS (Plaintiff) V/S MST. ASMA QAMAR & 3 OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 SBLR Sindh 666
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 07-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


241) 4391/2018 Const. P. Zaheer uddin Mujahid (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.277/2019 Zaheeruddin Mujahid v. Province of Sindh thr. Cooperative Department, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


242) 101/2013 Const. P. Syed Hasnain Raza (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.426-K/2019 Syed Hasnain Raza v. Federation of Pakistan thr. its Secy: I.T & Telecom M/o Information Technology and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


243) 1092/2015 Const. P. Sarha Rasheed (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anwar Hussain, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 14-MAY-16
Approved for Reporting


244) 538/2002 Suit Imdad Ali & other (Plaintiff) V/S Professional Builders & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed
Order Date: 07-NOV-08
Approved for Reporting


245) 181/2016 H.C.A Adam A. Muchhadda (Appellant) V/S Captain (R) H.A.Rahim (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar
Order Date: 10-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.301-K/2017 Adam A. Muchhadda v. Capt. (R) H.A. Rahim Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed for Non-Prosecution


246) 2216/2019 Const. P. Abdul Khalique (Petitioner) V/S S.P.S.C and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 10-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


247) 1109/2014 Adm. Suit SIKANDER ALI LASHARI S/O ALI MUHAMMAD LASHARI (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 12-DEC-14
Approved for Reporting


248) 735/2001 Suit KPT Officers Cooperative Housing Society Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Government of Sindh & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 08-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


249) 79/2014 Cr.Misc. M/s.Abid S. Zuberi & others (Applicant) V/S M/s.Kh.Shamsul Islam and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sadiq Hussain Bhatti, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 26-JAN-15
Approved for Reporting


250) 43/2017 II.A. Mst. Saba and others (Appellant) V/S Mst. Fatima and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 22-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


251) 6546/2016 Const. P. Bheru Lal (Petitioner) V/S PTCL and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 11-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting


252) 3580/2014 Const. P. Humair Altaf (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 06-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.221-K/2017 Humair Altaf v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secy: M/o Petroleum & Natural Resources and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


253) 3271/2020 Const. P. Bilqees (Petitioner) V/S The Sect: Wafaqi Mohtasib and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:whether Wafaqi Mohtasib is competent to absorb any deputationist by appointing her/him by transfer in the Establishment of the Wafaqi Mohtasib, Islamabad?
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1164/2021 Ms. Shahina Ahmed v. Bilqess and others,C.A.1349/2021 Ms. Shahina Ahmed v. Bilqess and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted.status quo be maintained.to be fixed after 3 months,Pending


254) 159/2020 Cr.Rev SYED ALI ZAIDI & ORS (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'be Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author)
Order Date: 20-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


255) 4920/2016 Const. P. Maqsood Ahmed & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
regularization issue of employees of PSQCA
Topic: Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3673/2020 Federation of Pakistan through its Secretary Ministry of Science and Technology, Islamabad & others v. Maqsood Ahmed and others,C.A.522/2021 Federation of Pakistan through its Secretary Ministry of Science and Technology, Islamabad & others v. Maqsood Ahmed and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted.to be fixed after 3 months.,Pending


256) 4/2012 H.C.A Mirza Afzal Baig (Appellant) V/S Mudabbir Ali Khan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 CLC 261
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 11-OCT-13
Approved for Reporting


257) 575/2009 Const. P. Mrs. Samina Zaheer Abbas (Petitioner) V/S Mr. Hassan S. Akhtar & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Sind Rented Premises Act - Eviction---15
Tag Line:Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----Ss. 16, 21 & 15---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts.199 & 4---Constitutional petition---Scope---Ejectment of tenant---Tentative rent order, non-compliance of---Effect---Landlords filed an ejectment petition wherein they moved an application under S. 16(1) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979---Application for payment of arrears of rent was accepted and tenant was directed to deposit the same who failed and her defence was struck off---Eviction petition was accepted concurrently---Validity---Tenant had failed to comply with the tentative rent order and she was guilty of non-compliance of the direction to deposit monthly rent---Said findings were findings of facts and no evidence was required to come to such conclusion---Order passed by the Appellate Authority was final and same could not be challenged through constitutional petition on the ground that "no other adequate remedy" had been provided by law or said finality attached to the order had violated the constitutional guarantees provided under Art. 4 of the Constitution to the tenant---Constitutional petition was dismissed and tenant was directed to vacate the premises within specified period.
Citation:2014 YLR 2331
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 04-AUG-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.265-K/2014 Samina Zaheer Abbas v. Hasan S. Akhtar and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


258) 703/2007 Suit MRS. BILQUIS MOHSIN BUTT & OTHERS. (Plaintiff) V/S MUHAMMAD MAHMOOD BUTT & ORS. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Order Vii, Rule 11 C.P.C
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XX, R. 13---Administration suit---Limitation---Scope---Suit for administration was only a formality to determine the mode of distribution of the estate of the deceased amongst the legal heirs according to the Shariah---Court would act only as an administrator in such suit for a limited purpose---Plaintiff was required to satisfy the court in a suit for administration and partition, his status as legal heir of the deceased and proprietary rights of the deceased in the estate at the time of opening of succession---Question of limitation in case of joint family properties did not arise---In the present case, none of the properties mentioned in the schedule were part of the estate of the deceased---Plaintiff could not seek administration and partition of the disputed properties---Suit was dismissed in circumstances. Pattoki Sugar Mills Limited through Chief Executive v. WAPDA through Chairman and 4 others 2007 CLD 659 and Anjum Rashid and others v. Shahzad and others 2007 CLC 1414 and Ghulam Ali and 2 others v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi PLD 1990 SC 1 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XX, R. 13---Administration suit---Limitation---Question of limitation in case of joint family properties did not arise. (c) Company--- ----Limited company was a juristic person and a legal entity separate from its share-holder and any change in the shareholding of a company did not mean change in the title of assets of the company or premises occupied thereby---Properties of a company could not be inherited by the legal heirs of one of its Directors or even ordinary shareholders of the company---Legal heirs of a deceased director or shareholder of a company could claim inheritance only to the extent of shareholding of the deceased Director or shareholder in the company and not in the assets of the company as estate of the deceased. (d) Islamic law--- ----Succession---Classes of legal heirs---Classes of legal heirs of deceased (in Sunni Hanfi Law of Succession) were sharer, residuaries and uterine (distant kindred). (e) Islamic Law--- ----Distribution of the estate of deceased---Procedure. Muhammadan Law paras 61 and 63 quoted. (f) Islamic law--- ----Succession---Succession to the estate of a Muslim would open immediately, he had passed away and title would pass to the legal heirs automatically to the extent of their respective shares ordained by Shariah without any interference by the State functionaries. (g) Islamic law--- ---- Inheritance---Grand-children whose father or mother had survived their grand-father had no locus standi to claim inheritance in the estate of the deceased grand-father---Once father/mother of grand-children had died (true legal heirs of grand-father) they could file a suit for administration of the estate left by their deceased parents and if there was any undistributed property from the estate of their grand-father, continued to be in existence, they could include "share" of their deceased parents in the said estate of their own deceased father or mother but they could not reopen the issue of inheritance from the entire estate of their grand-parents---Grand-children could not claim as matter of their own right any share in the estate of their grand-father.
Citation:2015 CLC 1333
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 30-JAN-15
Approved for Reporting


259) 3657/2017 Const. P. Ehsan Ali Siddiqui (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


260) 1497/2020 Const. P. Nasir Kamal (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:PNSC is hereby directed to pay all the post-retirement benefits to the petitioner strictly in accordance with law without fail within fifteen (15) days and to submit compliance report to this Court through MIT-II within seven (07) days thereafter. For future as well as for cases pending for calculation and/or payment of post-retirement benefits, PNSC is further directed to ensure compliance of the directions given by the Hon???ble Supreme Court in Haji Muhammad Ismail Advocate (supra) and Province of Punjab, through Conservator of Forest, Faisalabad (supra) in letter and spirit The petition is allowed in the above terms with costs.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan
Order Date: 03-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1089-K/2021 Pakistan National Shipping Corporation through its Chairman v. Nasir Kamal & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


261) 3319/2011 Const. P. Muhammad Ayub (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 27-APR-12
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1685/2012 N.A.D.R.A. thr. its Chairman, Islamabad v. Muhammad Ayub & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


262) 7042/2018 Const. P. M/s Karachi Golf Club (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Doctrine of Mutuality.
Citation:2021 PTD Sindh 558, 2021 SBLR Sindh 2102
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 10-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.538-K/2021 The Province of Sindh & others v. M/s. Karachi Golf Club (Pvt) Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


263) 5330/2019 Const. P. Mujahid Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
i) Whether the petitioner was non-suited by this Court vide judgment dated 30.3.2018 in earlier round of litigation and the same view was affirmed by the Honorable Supreme Court in Civil Petition No457-k of 2018, vide order dated 19.4.2018, therefore, similar relief cannot be claimed by filing subsequent legal proceedings? ii) Whether Rule 12 of Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules 1974 was amended vide Notification dated 14.9.2018 issued by the Chief Secretary Sindh, whereby relaxation up to maximum of fifteen (15) Years in the upper age limit to all the applicants applying for the vacancies in all the Departments of Government of Sindh were done away against the posts to be filled through Combined Competitive Examination by the Sindh Public Service Commission?
Topic: Service matters (age relaxation)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting


264) 306/2011 Const. P. Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority (Petitioner) V/S Prov of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 31-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


265) 9/2010 I. A M/s.Shaz Packages & Ors. (Appellant) V/S M/s.Bank Alfalah Ltd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 24-MAR-11
Approved for Reporting


266) 852/2019 Const. P. Naeem Sadiq and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:CBC janitorial staff-- minimum wage
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 10-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


267) 77/2008 M.A. Smithkline Beecham P.L.C. (Appellant) V/S The Registrar of Trade Marks and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 02-MAY-16
Approved for Reporting


268) 282/2015 Spl.H.C.A Bank Alfalah Limited (Appellant) V/S Interglobe Commerce Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 CLD 1428
Advocates:Ravi Pinjani(ADVO-11673-SBC-KHI),M/S. MOHSIN TAYEBALY & CO.(FIRM-118-SBC-KHI),Saalim Salam Ansari(ADVO-3307-SBC-KHI),Arshad Mohsin Tayebaly(ADVO-3740-SBC-KHI),Rabbani & Ansari()
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 07-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.406-K/2017 Bank Al-Falah Ltd. v. Integlobe Commerce Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


269) 8/2016 H.C.A Haroon (Appellant) V/S Abdul Aziz (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 07-APR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.390-K/2017 Haroon v. Abdul Aziz and another,C.A.67-K/2017 Haroon v. Abdul Aziz and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Converted into Appeal and Disposed of,Disposed


270) 13/2013 First Appeal Against Order Hassan Abbass (Appellant) V/S Ist Additional District & Session Judge (Central) at Karachi. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VII, R. 11---West Pakistan (Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Karachi) Ordinance (III of 1962), Ss.27 & 29---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.42---Suit for declaration---Correction of father's name was sought by plaintiff---Rejection of plaint---Scope---Name of maternal grandfather was mistakenly mentioned in the school record as name of father of plaintiff and same had been disclosed by him which was also supported by affidavit of his mother---Record maintained by the Education Board was incorrect and father of plaintiff and that of his mother could not be one and the same---Trial Court was bound to reconcile the record of Education Board with that of the correct name of father of plaintiff in view of available record---Education Board had not applied mind to the request made by the plaintiff through a proper application wherein ingredients of plaint and circumstances mentioned in the same had been brought to the notice of Education Board but same had been declined without assigning a cogent reason---Education Board had not mentioned the rules before the Trial Court which restrained them from making correction in the record---Section 27 of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Ordinance, 1962 did not mean that Education Board was a final authority and order passed by the same was not subject to review by the courts---Section 29 of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Ordinance, 1962 stipulated that no suit for damages or other legal proceedings should be instituted against Government and any member of Education Board or Committee---No decision or order of Education Board was under challenge nor plaintiff had claimed any damages against controlling authority or member of Education Board in the present suit---Present was a suit for correction in the relevant record of Education Board---Education Board was bound to make necessary correction once there was a satisfactory proof of mistake on the record---Refusal of Education Board to rectify the mistake in the certificate issued by Board was without any lawful jurisdiction---Impugned order passed by the Education Board was without reasoning and same was not a speaking order---Trial Court had rejected the plaint without proper trial which was contrary to the requirement of law---Orders passed by the Trial Court and Appellate Court were set aside and case was remanded for decision on merits after recording of evidence in accordance with law. (b) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----S. 5---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 42---Suit for declaration---Appeal---Non-disclosure of dismissal of appeal by the counsel to the appellant---Professional misconduct of counsel---Condonation of delay---Scope---Application was supported with a complaint against the counsel who had been representing the appellant before the Trial Court and first Appellate Court---Details of professional misconduct of counsel had been given in the affidavit with regard to the fact that he (counsel) did not disclose about the dismissal of appeal---Circumstances were not within the control of appellant to file present appeal in time who had accounted for the delay---Application for condonation of delay was accepted in circumstances.
Citation:2014 YLR 2042
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 10-MAY-14
Approved for Reporting


271) 232/2007 H.C.A Muhammad Saad &others (Appellant) V/S Amna & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 29-AUG-13
Approved for Reporting


272) 4164/2021 Const. P. Haleem Adil Shaikh (Petitioner) V/S Election Commission of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Muhammad Asif Qureshi(ADVO-10738-SBC-KHI),Faran Sardar(ADVO-19278-SBC-KHW)
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Ahmed Ali M. Shaikh(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed
Order Date: 28-SEP-21
Approved for Reporting


273) 145/2009 Cr.Rev Mrs. Ghazala Parveen (Applicant) V/S Sadiq Daniel & 18 others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 08-DEC-11
Approved for Reporting


274) 74/2015 S.M.A Mr Afia Baig w/o. Mirza Fawad Baig V/S (Petitioner) V/S Party-2 (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Succession Act
Tag Line:(a) Counsel and client--- ----Affidavit by advocate---Scope---Lawyer is not supposed to take place of his client when seeking any substantial relief which the client wanted from the Court---Lawyer cannot swear affidavit of facts relating to circumstances of his client in which need for an order from Court of law was felt for the client even on the advice of lawyer---Such facts and circumstances can only be in the personal knowledge of the client when neither application nor affidavit in support of application is signed by client. (b) Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925)--- ----Ss. 273 & 372---Chief Court Rules (O.S.), Rr. 340, 376, 377 & 399---Letters of Administration and succession certificate---Amended petition---Seeking of surety---Object---Necessary ingredients---Widow of deceased owner of property in question died during pendency of petition and applicant did not file proper amended petition---Validity---On the death of widow of deceased owner, in amended petition for the share inherited by her, amended petition must disclose her legal heirs---Once all codel formalities were honestly completed and petition of letter of administration was granted, it would be duty of petitioner to administer properties of both deceased parents as per law which could include first mutation in the name of respective legal heirs and then it would be the choice of new owners by way of inheritance to deal with their respective individual shares in joint properties the way they could wish to, but in accordance with law---Grant of letter of Administration was always subject to the Rules---Purpose of obtaining sureties by Court in terms of Rr. 399 & 340 of Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S.) was to ensure that petitioner would administer properties of deceased in accordance with law and honestly.
Citation:2017 MLD 460
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 14-OCT-16
Approved for Reporting


275) 639/2010 Const. P. Abrar Hussain (Petitioner) V/S VIIth A.D.J. South at Karachi & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Rent Matters)
Tag Line:Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act (XXXV of 1973)--- ----Ss. 41(2)(4) Proviso, 42 & 55---Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976, Chap. XII---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss.151 & 153---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Canon of professional conduct and etiquette of advocates---Misconduct---Dispute as to property---Constitutional petition filed for recalling an earlier order of dismissal of petition being not pressed, was not supported by affidavit---Application under Ss.151 & 153, C.P.C. was not filed on behalf of the petitioner by the advocate who also submitted his own affidavit---Validity---Lawyer earns a reputation worthy of some value by demonstrating his sincerity and honest conduct both towards his client and court in administration of justice---Upright lawyer is supposed to be an officer of court fairly assisting court in dispensing justice and not slave of his client nor greedy to serve him against law and facts---Lawyer has to contest cases on merit and merit alone, he was to adhere to standards of duties of lawyer explained in Chapt.XII (Canon of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of Advocates) of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976---Counsel for petitioner, in the present case, filed application in question on his own without any authority from anyone---High Court directed Pakistan Bar Council to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the counsel for professional misconduct by treating contents of order as complaint under S.41(2) of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973---High Court further directed the Tribunal for decision in terms of proviso to S. 41(4) of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973---Court official was directed to seal the property in question and locate respondents to hand over its possession to them after proper verification---Application was dismissed in circumstances.
Citation:2018 CLC 664
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 24-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


276) 3387/2018 Const. P. Abdul Qayoom Solangi (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PLC (CS) 50
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 18-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


277) 2863/2014 Const. P. Pir Kaleemullah and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 11-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.643-K/2018 Pir Kalimullah and another v. Province of Sindh thr. Cheif Secy: Govt. of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


278) 1231/2006 Suit Muhammad Ibrahim Hajano (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan State Oil Company Ltd (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 15-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting


279) 7596/2017 Const. P. Zulfiqar Ali Domki, Advocate (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 27-NOV-19
Approved for Reporting


280) 182/2009 Cr.Misc. Khuda Bux (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 19-MAR-10
Approved for Reporting


281) 120/2019 Cr.Bail Shahid Ahmed Shaikh (Applicant) V/S PO SIndh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 21-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


282) 2598/2016 Const. P. Rashid Ali Memon (Petitioner) V/S Chief Sect: and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Section 3 of Sindh Regularization Act, )
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1245
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


283) 461/2011 Cr.Bail Rashid (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 13-MAY-11
Approved for Reporting


284) 4026/2012 Const. P. Rashid Latif (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 27-NOV-13
Approved for Reporting


285) 6/2006 Adm. Suit Muhammad Hashim and another (Applicant) V/S Ghulam Mujtaba Shah and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 02-MAR-15
Approved for Reporting


286) 83/2011 Civil Revision Manzoor Meeraci & otheres (Applicant) V/S Muhammad Umar Mangsi & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 24-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


287) 887/2018 Const. P. Hassan Zada & Ors (Petitioner) V/S FOP & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:that their contingent/contractual/ work-charge appointments/services be regularized in respondent- Directorate of Training and Research (Customs, Excise & Sales Tax) Karachi without discrimination, with a further assertion, that they have already served in respondent- Directorate for a considerable period; and, they have the legitimate expectation for appointment on regular basis.
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


288) 71/2008 Suit.B SONERI BANK LTD (Plaintiff) V/S CLASSIC DENIM MILLS PVT LTD (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 30-NOV-10
Approved for Reporting


289) 1026/2017 Const. P. Aurangzeb and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Upgradation)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 09-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


290) 1218/2017 Cr.Misc. Mst. Zuriat W/o Sheeral Khan (Applicant) V/S Kouro Khan @ Kouro and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 21-JUN-19
Approved for Reporting


291) 3000/2012 Const. P. Landi Renzo Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 PTD 658, 2013 MLD 601
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 12-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.83-K/2013 M/s Landi Renzo Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. & others v. Federation of Pakistan & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


292) 24/2020 M.A. MUHAMMAD SHAH KAKAR THR ATTORNEY AHMED SHAH (Appellant) V/S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TRIBUNAL AT SINDH & BALOCHIS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: TRADE MARK (Section 5(2) of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001 ), TRADE MARK (Section 40 of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001), Custom Act, Itellectual Property Law (Trade Mark Cases)
Tag Line:SRO 170(I)/2017 dated 17.03.2017 is for "imported goods only" and was not applied to parallel or grey market imports and de-minimis imports. Powers to take action, detention, seizure, confiscation of goods imported into or taken out of Pakistan were/are always available with the customs officials and it is not that SRO 170(i)/2017 that has empowered them, it only set the process to be initiated by custom officials in relation to goods being imported. What was amended by virtue of SRO 768(I)/2014 is also very material. In Section 3CC and 3E of Customs Act, 1969 formation of the Director General of Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement was redesigned along with its functions, jurisdiction and powers. In the present case Tribunal could only pass order to the extent of trade mark being an infringed one or otherwise and to restrain it from being violated. The Procedural action of custom officials was not questioned independently by respondent. Once the effect of infringement was determined by tribunal the customs officials would definitely have followed it. Color and color scheme also at time claimed to be an inventive one but that is not the case here as no one has claimed livery or color scheme or get up to be a mark of distinction under any intellectual property rights. Both parties are contesting over one mark i.e Tabiat and no one has claimed any exclusive right over livery or dress up of mark. So everything is a disclaimer except "Tabiat". If there are deceptive liveries of common product like rice, with one trade mark "Tabiat" in the absence of a right claimed under the liveries, the buyer would definitely get confuse and jump to some other brand as a natural course. In terms of Section 5(2) of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001 goods even if not meant for a local consumption but only to enter the port for onwards journey, would mean the use of mark within jurisdiction. Unless goods in transit are defined otherwise, only aforesaid meaning is deducible. Construction of our Trade Mark Ordinance, 2001 is also based on same scheme and there is no inconsistency as far as framing of relevant provision trade mark is concerned. The word import or export (exclusively or inclusively) not defined under the law in hand differently that is dealing with goods in transit. The case of the appellant is on better footing since the attempt is made to export the goods from the territory where the mark is registered The word "use" as explained above is also applicable to goods "for export only" and hence Section 5(2) read with section 40 of Trade Mark ordinance 2001 would be interpreted accordingly as use within territory of Pakistan.
Citation:2021 CLD 48
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 03-JUN-20
Approved for Reporting


293) 1945/2013 Const. P. Ehsanullah Khan, Addl. Director FIA (Retired) (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Ahsanullah(ADVO-11208-SBC-KHI),Dy Attorney General(DAG),Naila Tabassum(ADVO-8444-SBC-KHI),In Person(INP)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 11-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.680/2017 Secretary Establishment Division and others v. Ehsanullah Khan Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed


294) 6555/2016 Const. P. Maj (R) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Contract employee)
Citation:2019 SCMR 984
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 12-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.514-K/2018 Maj. (R) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas v. Federation of Pakistan and another,C.A.26-K/2018 Maj. (R) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas v. Federation of Pakistan and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted [ Relist after summer vacation before a 3 Member Bench at Islamabad ],Disposed Dismissed


295) 89/2009 Cr.J.A Abdul Hayee (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 10-AUG-12
Approved for Reporting


296) 1602/2002 Suit Adnan Abid (Plaintiff) V/S Munaf Attara and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 28-APR-15
Approved for Reporting


297) 526/2014 Const. P. data not available, hyd case (Petitioner) V/S data not available (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 24-JUL-14
Approved for Reporting


298) 282/2017 Criminal Miscelleneous Mst. Nazi (Applicant) V/S The State & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 02-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


299) 421/1991 Suit Rahim Ali Palari & ors. (Plaintiff) V/S Govt. of Sindh & ors.. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Tort Law (Fatal Accident)
Tag Line:Suit under Fatal Accident Act is independent of proceeding under Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965 and Criminal Proceeding (If any). Res Ipsa Loquitor applies to fatal accident cases. If accident / incident disputed then onus on Defendant to disprove negligence. Defendant to disprove causation of death. Criteria for awarding damages. Deprivation of the association of a family member (loss of consortium). Tort Law as a Tool for enforcing good governance. Computing income of deceased when no evidence of employment.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 14-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


300) 2358/2015 Const. P. ORI-TECH, OILS PRIVATE LIMITED (Petitioner) V/S The Chief Commissioner Inland Revenue, Regional Tax Office-I, Karachi (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Emad-ul-Hasan(ADVO-5822-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Aqeel Qureshi(ADVO-7601-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 08-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.407-K/2017 The Commissioner Inland Revenue v. M/s ORI Tech Oil (Pvt) Ltd.,C.P.572-K/2015 Muhammad Mashooque v. Faiz Muhammad and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed as Infructuous


301) 4725/2015 Const. P. Mansoor Ashraf (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 30-AUG-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.662-K/2016 Mst. Fareeda Zafar and others v. Mansoor Ashraf and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


302) 4506/2018 Const. P. Mst. Shabana Noor (Petitioner) V/S D.G Immigration & Passport & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 12-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


303) 1119/2016 Const. P. M/s Qasim International Container Terminal Pak Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 19-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


304) 2951/2018 Const. P. Abdul Latif Brohi (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 13-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3658/2018 Abdul Latif Barohi v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Secretary M/o Interior, Islamabad & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


305) 476/2018 Cr.Bail MST. RUDAB BIBI D/O SYED AKBAR ALI SHAH (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S.497(1), first proviso---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.406 & 489-F---Criminal breach of trust, dishonestly issuing cheque---Bail, grant of---Accused, a lady---Statutory concession for accused lady---Scope---Burden of proof---Scope---Complainant had alleged that he, along with his near ones, invested a huge money with the firm of accused (lady) through her frontman---Later on, complainant came to know, the accused had defrauded and cheated many persons through her frontmen including her fiancee---When invested amount was demanded, accused issued many cheques and agreement was also signed by her frontman---Two cheques were dishonoured on presentation--- Validity--- Accused (lady) was nominated in the FIR and two dishonoured cheques of Rs. 3,26,94,200/- signed by her, was mentioned in the FIR---Assertion of the accused was immaterial that said cheques were not given by her to the complainant but by the co-accused (frontman) as burden of proof under S.489-F, P.P.C. was on the accused and not on the prosecution---Burden of proof of honestly issuing cheques being on the lady, therefore, the amount, for which allegedly cheques were issued, had to be secured---Accused could be admitted to bail on ground of statutory concession to her in terms of first proviso to S. 497, Cr.P.C and also that the punishment was only three years, therefore, the accused was admitted to bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 3,26,94,200/- and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court---Bail was granted to accused accordingly
Citation:2018 YLR 239
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 06-JUN-18
Approved for Reporting


306) 28/2019 Const. P. Arsalan Aijaz (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Sanober & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


307) 1916/2016 Const. P. M/s Continental Biscuit (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Input Tax adjustment denied pursuant to section 8(1)(h) & (i). Held-yes-Petition dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 04-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


308) 39/2011 Const. P. Darakshan Jahan (Petitioner) V/S Prov of Sindh & Ors (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 23-FEB-11
Approved for Reporting


309) 22/2015 Cr.Bail Mst Moona (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 19-OCT-15
Approved for Reporting


310) 202/2017 Cr.Rev N. J. AUTOS (Applicant) V/S THE STATE & 02 OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 22-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


311) 4452/2013 Const. P. Mir Hassan (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Son Quota (Dismissed))
Tag Line:Son Quota
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 06-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


312) 83/1995 Adm. Suit Mst. Parveen Shoukat (Petitioner) V/S none (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 07-OCT-16
Approved for Reporting


313) 237/2018 Cr.Acq.A. GHULAM MUJTABA S/O LATE ABDUL AZIZ (Appellant) V/S SYED HASSAN & ANOTHER (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Criminal Procedure Code
Tag Line:(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 182---False information with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person---Appeal against acquittal---"Aggrieved person"---Scope---Station House Officer (SHO) requested the trial court for prosecution of respondent under S. 182, P.P.C. on the ground that he had furnished false information for lodgment of first information report (FIR) under Ss. 506 and 34, P.P.C. read with S. 25 of Telegraph Act, 1885---Trial court acquitted the respondent of the charge---Validity---Appellant, nominated accused in earlier FIR, could not be aggrieved by the decision of the Magistrate on the complaint under S. 182, P.P.C. filed by public servant---Section 182, P.P.C. did not refer to any private person and it related "to cause public servant to use his power" and in case such information was found false then such public servant could initiate proceedings---Appellant was not a public servant nor the alleged false information was given to him---Right of appeal on the orders passed by Magistrate did not lie with the nominated accused for the reason that an appeal was continuity of original proceedings and admittedly the proceedings were not initiated by the appellant---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed. Khuwaja Muhammad Waseem v. Syed Jalees Anjum and others 2018 PCr.LJ 1230 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ---S. 182---False information with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person---Scope--- Proceedings under S. 182, P.P.C. are not a remedy of any humiliation or insult suffered by the accused nominated in the false information given by the complainant to the Incharge Police Station.
Citation:2019 MLD 1994
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 30-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


314) 5048/2016 Const. P. Azher Jawaid (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 SBLR Sindh 229
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi
Order Date: 13-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.6-K/2017 Azhar Jawaid v. Federation of Pakistan and others,C.P.19-K/2017 Azhar Jawaid v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Allowed,Disposed Leave Granted with Notice to Respondents.


315) 2275/2017 Suit M/s. Inbox Business Technologies Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 SBLR Sindh 244
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 09-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


316) 44/2021 M.A. Pakistan International Airlines Corporation Ltd (Appellant) V/S The Court of District Judge, Khi (East) & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Succession Act, Carriage By Air Act, 2012 (Rule 6 of 6th Schedule)
Tag Line:Precisely the gist of law and the succession application provides that the litigation commenced for issuance of a certificate in terms of Rule 1, 2 and 6 of Sixth Schedule of the ibid Act 2012. It enabled one of the legal heirs of the deceased to pursue the proceedings on behalf of all legal heirs who sustained damages to claim compensation from the airline. -Respondent No.2 approached District Judge/ respondent No.1 for issuance of requisite succession certificate. The District Judge/ Respondent No.1 however in terms of order impugned in these proceedings treated such compensation as an asset left by the deceased/victim and by considering it as part of succession application and has taken action in terms of the impugned order, which action is being challenged by the appellant/PIA in these proceedings. I disapprove the observation of the District Judge to the extent whereby recovery process was initiated.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 03-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.813-K/2021 Pakistan International Airlines Corporation Limited v. The Court of District & Sessions Judge East at Karachi. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned [ Notice to Respondent ]


317) 29/2011 Civil Revision Haji Abdul Rasool Tunio (Applicant) V/S S.D.O Hesco Wapda and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 18-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


318) 427/2013 Const. P. Shahid Ansari & others (Petitioner) V/S The Chairman NAB & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ghulam Sarwar Korai
Order Date: 06-MAR-14
Approved for Reporting


319) 5176/2013 Const. P. Syed Muhammad Shoaib (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 SBLR Sindh 443
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 15-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.121-K/2017 M/s Hadeed Welfare Trust thr. CEO Bin Qasim, Karachi and another v. Syed Muhammad Sohaib and others,C.P.599-K/2018 Syed Muhammad Shoaib and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed


320) 1375/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Iqbal Kazi and others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 18-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.410-K/2019 Muhammad Iqbal Kazi and others v. Province of Sindh thr. Secy/Irrigation Deptt: Govt. of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


321) 1511/2019 Const. P. Jam Mitha Khan (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Petitioner is seeking direction to the Respondents to issue notification of his post-retirement benefits, on the premise that he was appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) BPS-17 in Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) ---the petitioner???s Counsel was directed to assist this Court more particularly regarding Article 187(2) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 that whether this Court can examine and or modify the Judgment of the Hon???ble Supreme Court or only to enforce it in accordance with the law--We in the circumstances are constrained to direct Sindh Government to pay all his perks and privileges to which he was entitled to on issuance of notification of his repatriation, inclusive of his entire pensionary benefits within [02] months and report compliance through MIT-II of this court.
Topic: Service matters (post retirement benefits)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 23-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting


322) 1089/2016 Const. P. MAL Pakistan Ltd (Petitioner) V/S PAKISTAN through secretary revnue Division (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 27-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


323) 665/2003 Suit Umar Islam Khan (Plaintiff) V/S Abdul Basit and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Declaration and Cancellation)
Tag Line:Suit for Declaration and Cancellation decreed. Held that the impugned transaction/transfer in favour of Defendant No. 1 is to be struck down on three grounds. (i) Admittedly no sale price was paid by the Defendant no. 1 to plaintiffs. (ii) Even the mother could not have entered into such type of transaction, if at all it even assumed that deceased mother of plaintiffs did sign the affidavit, though no convincing evidence has been led by Defendant No. 1 with regard to this fact, and (iii) Under section 11 of Contract Act, Plaintiffs No. 2 and 3, being minors at that relevant time, could not have entered into sale transaction with Defendant No. 1, again, even if it assumed that these plaintiffs had signed the documents under challenge; such kind of transaction is held void ab initio.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 23-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


324) 1872/2016 Suit Saleem Butt.. (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Challenge to the vires of section 230(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 on the ground of delegation of excessive legislative power ??? not successful. While making such challenge, the Plaintiff had also to demonstrate infringement of a Fundamental Right. SRO 115(I)/2015 re the conferring of powers and functions on the DG I&I, was within the jurisdiction of the FBR. Effect of striking-down of same SRO by another High Court ??? discussed. The invoking of section 176 does not militate against the concept of deemed assessment under section 122 of the Ordinance. Malafides had to be pleaded with particulars.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


325) 4658/2018 Const. P. Dewan Motors (Pvt) Ltd and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:A Divisional Bench of this Court comprising of Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi, has pronounced the judgment on 06.08.2020 in the case of Dewan Motors (Pvt) Ltd. and others v. Federation of Pakistan & others (along with connected petitions), wherein, the Hon'ble bench of Sindh High Court has been pleased to dispose of all the petitions in the following terms:- " (i) The impugned sub-section (2) of Section 221-A of the Customs Act, 1969, as added vide Finance Act, 2018, is ultra vires to the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, as through impugned amendment the legislature has attempted to validate constitutional defect while making amendment in sub-section (3) of Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1969, and issuance of SRO 1035(I)/2017 dated 16.10.2017, through Finance Act, 2017, however, without making the required constitutional amendment. (ii) The Regulatory Duty charged and collected pursuant to amendment in sub-section (3) of Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1969, and issuance of SRO 1035(I)/2017, through Finance Act, 2017, has already been declared by the Divisional Bench of this Court in the case of Premier Systems (Pvt) Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan and others (2018 PTD 861), as illegal and unconstitutional in the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mustafa Impex, Karachi & others vs. The Government of Pakistan & others, (PLD 2016 SC 808), therefore, in the absence of any constitutional amendment, cannot be validated through subsequent amendment in law, while giving it retrospective effect in respect of past and closed transaction, therefore, no Regulatory Duty can be charged, collected or recovered for the period starting from the date of commencement of Finance Act, 2017 till the date of commencement of Finance Act, 2018. .
Citation:2021 PTD 232, 2021 PTCL 178
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi
Order Date: 06-AUG-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.836-K/2020 Federation of Pakistan through Revenue Division & others v. Dewan Motors (Pvt) Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned (Notice) to A.G.P. as well.


326) 4469/2013 Const. P. Prof. Dr. Masood Hameed Khan (Petitioner) V/S Governor of Sind and Ors (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 PLC CS 1014
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 12-JUN-14
Approved for Reporting


327) 4329/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Tahir Khan Chandio & Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 11-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.240-K/2020 Province of Sindh and others v. Muhammad Tahir Khan Chandio and others,C.A.928/2020 Province of Sindh and others v. Muhammad Tahir Khan Chandio and others,C.P.877-K/2021 Muhammad Faisal & others v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted.to be fixed after 3 months.,Disposed Dismissed for Non-Prosecution,Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


328) 750/2016 Suit Syed Farukh Mazhar (Plaintiff) V/S SGS Headquarters and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Injunciton Dismissed)
Tag Line:Injunction dismissed.
Citation:2018 PLD Sindh 327
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 17-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


329) 18/2014 I.T.R.A COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (Applicant) V/S M/S. UNIVERSAL LEATHER (PRIVATE) LTD (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 01-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.21-K/2018 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. M/s Univeral Leather (Pvt) Ltd.,C.A.61-K/2019 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. M/s Univeral Leather (Pvt) Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed,Disposed


330) 722/2018 Cr.Bail Jumoon S/o Muhammad ALi (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 25-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


331) 731/2020 Cr.Bail LIAQUAT ALI (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 28-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


332) 510/2010 Cr.J.A Rehmatullah & another (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Athar Saeed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 13-JUN-11
Approved for Reporting


333) 190/2017 Const. P. A-One Laboratories and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 15-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


334) 6666/2016 Const. P. Majid Anwar Seehar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Out of turn promotion)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) Note 40
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 16-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


335) 2/2015 J.M Province of Sindh & Others (Applicant) V/S Bilqees & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 SBLR Sindh 1920
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 09-JUN-16
Approved for Reporting


336) 43/2009 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Collector of Customs (Applicant) V/S Shaikh Nasir Ali (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 10-MAR-10
Approved for Reporting


337) 19/2013 Spl.Cr.A.T.A. Nawab Siraj Ali S/o Imdad Ali Talpur (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Judgment in murder case of Shahzaib
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 13-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.2-K/2018,Crl.A.3-K/2018,Crl.P.724/2019,Crl.A.400/2019 SCP Status:Disposed ,Disposed Disposed of+ directions,Disposed Leave Granted,Pending


338) 1076/2013 Suit Digri Sugar Mills Limited and others. (Plaintiff) V/S Mian Kamran Elahi and others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:In a Suit for Declaration, Injunction, Cancellation, Rendition of Accounts and Recovery, Plaintiffs had sought a restraining order against Defendants from presenting postdated cheques given as security pursuant to written agreements between the parties; or to use the same for any criminal proceedings or otherwise. Defendants opposed this application on the ground that section 56 (e) of the Specific Relief Act bars grant of any such permanent injunction; hence, no temporary injunction can be granted. The Court repelled this argument and allowed the injunction application by passing a temporary injunction and restrained the Defendants from using such cheques in any manner pending trial of the Suit.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 19-FEB-20
Approved for Reporting


339) 1767/2014 Suit Abdul Sattar Shaikh. (Plaintiff) V/S Adeel Zahoor Malik & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Violation of proprietary right being a fundamental right should be remedied forthwith. Failure to examine both attesting witnesses of a Sale Agreement, which is a disputed document, is fatal to the case of Defendant, who is basing his claim on the Sale Agreement. Sufficient evidence is brought on record justifying grant of mesne profits. No Village / Goth can exist in a developed Scheme-36. The Passport entries and presumption of genuineness as envisaged in Articles-90, 92 and 129 (e) of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, is attracted. Hence, Plaintiff is entitled to mesne profits. The conclusive evidence about the wrongful / illegal possession of Defendants No.1 and 2 of the suit plot does not require an inquiry as mentioned in Order XX, Rule 12, Sub Rule 1 (b). Suit Decreed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 30-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


340) 1331/2008 Const. P. Sardar Nisar (Petitioner) V/S Registrar Coop. Societies & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 04-FEB-10
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.156-K/2011 Sardar Nisar v. Registrar Cooperative Societies and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Barred by Time


341) 1134/2011 Suit M/S. SADAT BUSINESS GROUP LTD (Plaintiff) V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 CLD 1451
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 09-MAY-13
Approved for Reporting


342) 31/2009 Cr.Misc. P.C Zulfiqar Ali Jakhrani (Applicant) V/S Shah Muhammad and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah(Author)
Order Date: 02-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting


343) 571/2009 Cr.Bail Muhammad Hanif S. Kalia and two others (Applicant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'be Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha
Order Date: 06-JUL-09
Approved for Reporting


344) 7678/2015 Const. P. HBL (Petitioner) V/S Full Bench NIRC and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:HBL--back benefits--Through this petition, the petitioner-Habib Bank Limited (HBL) is praying for setting aside the order dated 28.10.2015 passed by the Full Bench of National Industrial Relations Commission Islamabad (NIRC-FB) in Appeal No.12(18)/2015-K, whereby order dated 05.01.2015 passed by the learned Single Bench of National Industrial Commission, at Karachi (NIRC-SB), in Grievance Petition No.4B (187)/2012-K, filed by the private respondent, was allowed with the compensatory cost of Rs.100,000/- while granting salary and all admissible back benefits to him by treating him to be in service from the date of his dismissal from service i.e. 09.09.2003, till reaching the age of superannuation i.e. 12.12.2012; and, he was also declared to be entitled to have pensionary benefits with effect from 12.12.2012 in terms of the ratio of the judgment passed by this Court in C.P. No.D-886 of 2011.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3062/2021 Habib Bank Limited, Karachi v. Full Bench, National Industrial Relations Commission and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


345) 1017/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Rashid and 93 others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Petitioners have impugned the Notification whereby they have been relieved / repatriated to their parent department that is Karachi Development Authority. The reason assigned by the competent authority in the said impugned Notification is that the Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan passed directives vide order dated 01.08.2016 on CMA No. 243/2016 in C.P No.108-K of 2014 to repatriate the officers/officials absorbed in Malir Development Authority to their parent department .In our view, once the Hon??????ble Supreme Court has passed order the terms that any official working on deputation or otherwise absorbed in the MDA shall immediately report back to his parent department this Court has no justification to take contrary view of the same. We are of the view that the only remedy available to the Petitioners is to approach the Hon??????ble Apex Court in Review and not this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution. Consequently ,both the Constitution Petitions merit no consideration and are dismissed with no order as to cost
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-APR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.402-K/2017 Shahid Ali Khan v. Province of Sindh and others,C.P.560-K/2017 Muhammad Zahid Khan v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of,Disposed Disposed of


346) 5430/2020 Const. P. Imad Samad (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


347) 4106/2019 Const. P. M/s Elite Screener (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 19-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


348) 1022/2011 Suit MST. AZRA PERVEZ & ORS (Plaintiff) V/S SHEIKH ASHFAQ HUSSAIN & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 09-SEP-14
Approved for Reporting


349) 212/2019 Criminal Appeal Parvaiz (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
1200 grams of charas appeal allowed
Tag Line:1200 grams of charas appeal allowed
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-AUG-20
Approved for Reporting


350) 4970/2017 Const. P. Sapphire Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Section 5A ITO 2001 struck down.
Citation:2021 PTD 971
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 30-APR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.926-K/2021 The Commissioner Inland Revenue, (Legal) v. Saphire Textile Mills Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


351) 2651/2016 Suit Zohaib Shakoor (Plaintiff) V/S Mahwish Pirzada & another. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Injunction Granted. )
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 06-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


352) 920/2015 Suit Party-1 (Plaintiff) V/S Party-2 (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 18-AUG-16
Approved for Reporting


353) 2562/2015 Const. P. Tasawar Abbas Tanveer (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:S. Ashfaq Hussain Rizvi(ADVO-3111-SBC-KHI),In Person(INP)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 11-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.64-K/2017 Tasawar Abbas Tanveer v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


354) 638/2019 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Collector of Customs (Applicant) V/S M/s. Junaid Enterprises (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


355) 533/2016 Suit Zain Khan. (Plaintiff) V/S Taj Roshan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 16-APR-18
Approved for Reporting


356) 58/2020 Cr.Rev Faraz Memon (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 31-AUG-20
Approved for Reporting


357) 2165/2012 Const. P. M/s. Naushero Feroz-I CNG Station (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 YLR 2198, 2019 SBLR 346
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 02-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1119-K/2018 M/s Naushehro Feroze-1, CNG Station v. Federation of Pakistan thr Secy: M/o Petroleum and Natural Resoures and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


358) 913/2020 Const. P. Ali Muhammad and another (Petitioner) V/S Mukaram Khan and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Habeas Corpus--custody of minors--In view of the statement of the parties, the petitioners are directed to furnish an indemnity bond of Rs. 200,000/- before the Nazir of this Court for the aforesaid purpose and in the meanwhile petitioners shall not take away the custody of minors out of the jurisdiction of the learned Guardian and Wards Court without intimation to the concerned Court. However, the respondent-father shall have visitation rights in the intervening period subject to tentative payment of maintenance of the minors @ Rs.3000/- per month for each minor and maintenance at the rate of Rs.5000/- per month for petitioner-mother till final adjudication by the learned trial Court. On the aforesaid proposition, I am fortified by the decision rendered by the Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Humayun Hassan v. Arslan Humayun and another, PLD 2013 SC 557.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 07-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


359) 5101/2015 Const. P. Lt. Col. Syed Jawaid Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 SBLR Sindh 459
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 10-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1013/2019 Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority thr. its Secretary, Karachi & others v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secretary M/o Defence, Islamabad & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


360) 2987/2018 Const. P. TCS (Pvt) Ltd & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Post & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 PLD SC 69
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 03-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4990/2018 Skynet Worldwide Express, Karachi & others v. Pakistan Post having their place of business at Director General, Pakistan Post Office, Islamabad & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


361) 19/2000 Civil Revision Abdul Baqi & others (Applicant) V/S Abdul Salam & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 11-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


362) 1724/2009 Suit MST.ZAIBUNISA & ORS. (Plaintiff) V/S IQBAL AHMED & ORS. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Specific Relief Act, , Tort Law, Administration Suits
Tag Line:Section 39 of Specific Relief Act. Cancellation of Document. An instrument inherently void not required a formal cancellation under Section 39 of Specif Relief Act. Object of Law is to advance justice and remedy the wrong forthwith, instead of putting a law abiding person through the mill. to enforce orderly behaviour in a society. General Damages awarded for sufferings of Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs awarded general damages due to protracted litigation and on account of fraudulent act of Defendants.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 28-JAN-19
Approved for Reporting


363) 378/2017 Const. P. Syed Mubarik Ali Zaidi (Petitioner) V/S The Finance Director HESCO (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 14-JAN-19
Approved for Reporting


364) 20/2017 Const. P. Mrs. Humaira Imran. (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 PLD Sindh 467
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


365) 3962/2011 Const. P. Muhammad Naved Aslam & Others (Petitioner) V/S EDO Revenue & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2016 CLC 132
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 13-NOV-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.413-K/2014 Mst. Aisha Siddiqi v. Muhammad Naveed Aslam and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


366) 6211/2016 Const. P. M/s Liberty Mills Ltd and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Citation:2021 PTD 347
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.423-K/2021 M/s. Liberty Mills Limited & others v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Finanace & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


367) 277/2014 Const. P. Pharmatee Pakistan PVT LTD (Petitioner) V/S Bakht Rehman and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 25-NOV-19
Approved for Reporting


368) 4287/2020 Const. P. Sahib Khan Lund Baloch (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Petitioner, who is serving at present as Assistant Commissioner in BPS-17, is aggrieved by the purported decision of the Provincial Selection Board-II (`PSB-II`) dated 09.3.2020 and 11.3.2020, whereby his promotion to the post of Deputy Secretary (Equivalent BPS-18) was deferred on the ground that his Annual Confidential Reports (`ACRs`)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 20-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


369) 3468/2021 Const. P. M/s Kiran Food Products (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Import of betel nuts under Serial No.5 of Part-I and Serial No.155 of Part-III of Appendix B of Import Policy Order, 2020; has to be regulated by Plant Protection Department under the Quarantine Act and the Rules framed thereunder and not by the Customs department.
Advocates:Abdul Sattar Pirzada(ADVO-13903-SBC-KHI),Mamoon Nawaz Chaudhry(ADVO-11348-SBC-KHE),Dy Attorney General(DAG),Shahab Imam(ADVO-19121-SBC-KHE)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Rashida Asad(Author)
Order Date: 23-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


370) 877/2007 Suit M/S. NISAR AHMED JAPANWALA (Plaintiff) V/S THE C.D.G.K. & ORS. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 06-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


371) 3055/2016 Const. P. Maqsood Ahmed and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Since respondent No 3 has crossed the age of 60 years and left his position from KPT, no further action is required. However, it is made clear that he is not entitled to a second pension from KPT due to his illegal deputation and subsequent absorption in KPT in the intervening period without the approval of the competent authority as discussed in the preceding paragraphs---Before parting with this order, it may be observed that even on moral ground, the illegalities committed by the management of KPT and respondent No.3, being a retired naval forces personnel and a patriot, was expected to act honestly in the best interest of the country. However, he chose not only to get himself illegally absorbed in KPT, but also claimed and received pension from their different services causing heavy loss to the national exchequer.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1325/2021 CDR (R) Khalid Munir v. Maqsood Ahmed and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


372) 365/2019 Const. P. Khadim Hussain (Petitioner) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


373) -758/2021 Suit MIAN NASSER HYATT MAGGO (Plaintiff) V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 19-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


374) 71/2010 Execution ARK GARMENT INDUSTRY (Decree Holder) V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & ANOTHER (Judgment Debtor)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Execution. )
Tag Line:the Applicant/ Decree Holder under Order IX Rules 9 of C.P.C read with Section of 151 C.P.C the applicant has clearly demonstrated sufficient cause for non-appearance on 27.10.2015 and 18.11.2015. Accordingly, present application is allowed and the order dated 18.11.2015 passed by this Court is recalled and Execution Application is restored to its original position.
Citation:2018 CLC 155
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 20-SEP-17
Approved for Reporting


375) 31/2019 M.A. Muhammad Yameen Qureshi (Appellant) V/S Arshad (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Amenity Plot (Conversion of amenity plot into Residential / commercial)
Tag Line:In the light of decision rendered by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Ardeshir Cowasjee vs. Karachi Building Control Authority (1999 SCMR 2883) and order passed by the learned Tribunal in the matter, I am of the considered view that the official respondents are under legal obligation to comply the directives of the Honourable Supreme Court passed in the cases of removal of illegal encroachment of amenity plots / public properties from its occupants
Citation:2021 CLC 19
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 08-NOV-19
Approved for Reporting


376) 4377/2012 Const. P. Dr. Itrat Malik (Petitioner) V/S State Life Insurance Co-opration & ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Dismissal-Termination)
Citation:2019 SBLR Sindh 1861
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 29-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2849/2018 State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan thr. its Chairman, Karachi & others v. Dr. Itrat Malik Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


377) 82/2018 I. A Mrs. Asma Hassan & another (Appellant) V/S Askari Bank Limited (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: LIMITATION (Limitation Act 1908)
Tag Line:As a consequence hereof the Limitation Application has become infructous and is disposed-of.
Citation:2020 CLC 1068, 2019 SBLR Sindh 2030
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 13-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.436-K/2019 Mrs Asma Hassan and another v. Askari Bank Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


378) 2249/2016 Suit Indus Motor Co., Limited. (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Audit of Taxpayers under Section 25 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 and Section 45 and 46 of the Federal Excise Act 2005.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 13-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


379) 86/2014 II.A. Mst. Nargis Ehsan Malik & Others (Appellant) V/S Arshad Mehmood Mir & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author)
Order Date: 29-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.1-K/2019 Mst: Nargis Ehsan Malik thr. her L.Rs and others v. Arshad Mehmood Mir Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Adjourned [ Appeal converted into Civil Petition)


380) 166/2018 Const. P. Sajid Ali (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Change of date of examination)
Tag Line:Reverting to the plea taken by the Petitioner that other seven candidates were allowed to appear in the interview and he was left out. The aforesaid plea of the Petitioner cannot be considered as a valid ground to appear in the interview; therefore we do not see any discrimination on their part as discussed supra. The Petitioner has failed to make out a case on the basis of discrimination
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aziz-ur-Rehman, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 15-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.390-K/2019 Sajid Ali v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secy: M/o Finance and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


381) 163/2013 Adm. Suit Muhammad Hussain (Applicant) V/S The State (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ghulam Sarwar Korai
Order Date: 18-FEB-14
Approved for Reporting


382) 69/2004 Execution Allied Bank of Pakistan (Decree Holder) V/S Fateh textile Mills ltd & othes (Judgment Debtor)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed
Order Date: 22-DEC-06
Approved for Reporting


383) 4465/2016 Const. P. Dr. Shafiq Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 01-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2782/2017 Oil & Gas Development Company (OGDCL) thr. its Managing Director and another v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secretary M/o Petroleum & Natural Resources, Islamabad and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of+contempt proceedings suspended.


384) 1736/2013 Const. P. Akhlaque Hussain Memon and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:whether the post of Additional/Assistant Advocate General could be filled amongst District Attorneys as per the Sindh Law Officers (Conditions of Service Rules), 1940 as amended up to date; and, whether between the notification dated 10.5.2016 bearing S.REG:1(22)2015/117 and notification dated 9.4.2018 bearing S.REG.4(07)/2018 which one is to prevail; and, whether the service structure for Deputy District Attorney and District Attorney in Solicitor Department, Government of Sindh needs to be streamlined ?
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 03-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


385) 3852/2018 Const. P. Total Parco Pakistan Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 30-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


386) 95/2020 Cr.Rev GHOUS BUX S/O SUFAR KHAN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 16-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


387) 1027/2015 Suit Shapes (Pvt) Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Cantonment Board Clifton and another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 12-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting


388) 1589/2013 Const. P. Kaleemullah (Petitioner) V/S C.E.O HESCO and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: WAPDA CASES
Citation:2020 SBLR Sindh 365
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 05-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


389) 4953/2020 Const. P. Peoples University of Medical & Health Sci (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Reasons assigned to the short order dated 11.11.2020 passed in the MDCAT petitions viz. C.P. Nos.D-4953, 5036, 5158, 5237 of 2020 (challenging the vires of Pakistan Medical Commission Act, 2020) by Division Bench of Sindh High Court comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry.
Citation:2021 SBLR Sindh Note 522
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 11-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1301-K/2020 Peoples University of Medical & Health Seiences for Womon & others v. Pakistan Ministry of Health Services & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned on adj application


390) 2108/2018 Const. P. Muhammad Asim Abbasi (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (age relaxation)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 30-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


391) 33/2016 II.A. Muhammad Tariq (Appellant) V/S Afzal Hussain (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan
Order Date: 03-AUG-16
Approved for Reporting


392) 1211/1996 Suit LT. COL (R) MUHAMMAD WALI KHAN. (Plaintiff) V/S UNIVERSITY OF KARACHI (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 18-MAY-16
Approved for Reporting


393) 993/2016 Cr.Bail DR. ASIM HUSSAIN S/O TAJAMUL HUSSAIN (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 PCr.LJ 631
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi
Order Date: 11-NOV-16
Approved for Reporting


394) 2413/2019 Const. P. Shaheena Nasreen (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Proforma Promotion)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


395) 5773/2016 Const. P. Muhammad Irfan Khan (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 SCMR 98
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1444-K/2018 House Building Finance Company Ltd. and others v. Muhammad Irfan Khan and others,C.A.86-K/2018 House Building Finance Company Ltd. and others v. Muhammad Irfan Khan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Disposed Allowed


396) 410/2017 Cr.Appeal SHABBIR AHMED S/O SHER MUHAMMAD (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 08-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


397) 1542/2008 Suit MUHAMMAD BACHAL (Plaintiff) V/S PROV OF SINDH & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 25-MAY-11
Approved for Reporting


398) 954/2016 Const. P. Ms. Rehana Parveen (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Promotion)
Citation:2018 PLC (CS) Note 123
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 18-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.354-K/2017 Ms. Rehana Parveen v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


399) 2899/2013 Const. P. UMER FAROOQ (Petitioner) V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 PTD 894
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 27-NOV-13
Approved for Reporting


400) 113/2011 I. A Al Baraka Bank Pvt Ltd (Appellant) V/S Raja Ashfaq Hussain (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 CLD 511, 2013 SBLR Sindh 318
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 07-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


401) 2019/2015 Suit A&Z Agro Industries (Pvt) Limited. (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others.. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Search of premises under section 38 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, and section 175 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 13-SEP-21
Approved for Reporting


402) 1461/2016 Suit Mohsin Abbas. (Plaintiff) V/S Air Waves Media (Pvt) Ltd., & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 16-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


403) 2253/2020 Const. P. M/s Majeed & Sons Steel (Pvt) Ltd and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 28-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2652/2020 K-Electric Limited through its CEO, Karachi v. Federation of Pakistan through Secy. M/o Energy and thr. Secy. M/o Finance Pakistan Secretariat, Islamabad and others,C.A.1119/2020 Majeed & Sons Steels (Private) Limited, Karachi and others v. Federation of Pakistan through Secy. M/o Energy and thr. Secy. M/o Finance Pakistan Secretariat, Islamabad and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted and be fixed on 4.12.2020 (Friday),Pending Adjourned (Notice) Repeat. (-) Mr Justice Sajjad Ali Shah.Also Notice to PEMRA and AG . Relist in week commencng 14th Dec


404) 8152/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Shahzad (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 25-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


405) 85/2011 II.A. Gul-e Nasreen (Applicant) V/S Maj. Lala Rukh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC
Tag Line:(a) Administration of justice--- ----Courts to act in accordance with law and decide the cases on the basis of legally admissible evidence on record---Decisions had to be in consonance with entire evidence---Evidence led by the parties should be discussed in support of reasoning in arriving at a particular findings---Judgments passed by the courts below being not in accordance with law and evidence on record by High Court were set aside. [Paras. 14 & 15 of the judgment] [Case-law referred] (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 100---Second appeal---Scope---Second appeal would be competent if findings on facts were result of mis-reading, non-reading of evidence or same were perverse. [Para. 13 of the judgment]
Citation:2017 CLC Note 211
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 29-JUN-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.2084/2016 Hafiz Muhammad Iqbal v. Gul-e-Nasreen & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Partly Allowed


406) 1042/2021 Const. P. Muhammad Ahmed Khan (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:regularization
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.429-K/2021 Muhammad Ahmed Khan v. Federation of Pakistan & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


407) 6550/2020 Const. P. Abdul Raheem @ Manghar (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Removal of encroachments from irrigation land.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 08-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


408) 1644/2018 Cr.Bail NAZIM HUSSAIN S/O HADI HUSSAIN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


409) 243/1989 Civil Revision Deputy Comm Thatta (Applicant) V/S Karim Bux (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VIII, R. 10, O. IX, R. 9 & S. 79---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts.2(c), 70 & 72---Sindh Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), Ss.172 & 161---Suit for declaration---Defence, striking off---Scope---Trial Court while dismissing application for adjournment to file written statement ordered for ex parte proceedings and on the basis of affidavit in ex parte proof decreed the suit---Validity---Trial Court had decreed the suit without examining the plaintiff on oath---Original documents were never filed by the plaintiff with his affidavit in ex-parte proof---Mere filing of an ex parte proof by an affidavit was not production of evidence---Only photocopies had been produced as evidence, which were not admissible in evidence---Trial Court was bound to examine the correctness, veracity and truth of the claim of plaintiff set out in the plaint---Parties approaching the court should succeed on the merits of their own case and not on account of weakness of other side---Requirement of evidence could not be ignored by the courts while pronouncing judgment under O.VIII, R.10, C.P.C.---Defendants were government functionaries and not the government themselves---Suit should have been dismissed on account of non-compliance of provisions of S.79, C.P.C. as Government had not been impleaded in the same---Plaintiff had challenged the order of Deputy Commissioner with regard to boundaries of suit plot which was appealable---Civil courts had no jurisdiction in the matters within the jurisdiction of revenue authorities---When remedy of appeal was available under special law then jurisdiction of civil court could not be invoked without exhausting the remedies provided in the statute itself-- Present suit was barred by law---Plaintiff had not adduced evidence in accordance with law in support of his claim before the Trial Court---Public functionaries were not produced in the witness box to confirm the documents and verify contents thereof filed by the plaintiff with the plaint---Both the courts below had failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in them---Impugned judgments and decrees were set aside and suit was dismissed in circumstances. Nisar Ahmed and others v. Habib Bank Ltd. 1980 CLC 981; Haji Muhammad Moosa and another v. Provincial Government of Balochistan 1986 CLC 2951; Malik Muhammad Saeed v. Mian Muhammad Sadiq 1985 MLD 1440; Divisional Forest Officer, Afforestation Division, Sanghar at Khipro v. Khan through Legal Heirs and 10 others 2008 SCMR 442; Government of Balochistan, CWPP&H Department and others v. Nawabzada Mir Tariq Hussain Khan Magsi and others 2010 SCMR 115; Province of Punjab v. Muhammad Hussain PLD 1993 SC 147 and Haji Abdul Aziz v. Government of Balochistan through Deputy Commissioner, Khuzdar 1999 SCMR 16 rel. (b) Sindh Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----S. 161---Appeal before revenue authority---When remedy of appeal was available under special law then jurisdiction of civil court could not be invoked without exhausting the remedies provided in the statute itself. (c) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 2(c)---Evidence---Scope---Evidence could be produced by making a statement on oath.
Citation:2016 CLC 1372
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 12-JAN-16
Approved for Reporting


410) 558/2020 Cr.Bail MUHAMMAD YOUSUF S/O JAN MUHAMMAD (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Effect of the prohibition in section 51(1) of the CNS Act, 1997.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 19-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting


411) 655/2010 Suit LUCKY CEMENT LTD (Petitioner) V/S HMS BERGBAU AG & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 24-DEC-10
Approved for Reporting


412) 2013/2015 Suit M/s. A.F Ferguson & Co., & Others. (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line: In all these Suits the claim of the Plaintiffs was to the effect that in terms of Section 92 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 there is no compulsion or restriction that it is only the firm which can file its return and pay taxes on the income, as at the same time, the partners of the firm are also qualified to file their return and pay the tax accordingly and in that situation the firm would not be liable to pay any tax on the income on which the partners have already paid the tax. According to the Plaintiffs, Section 92 does not prohibit the partners from paying tax on their income as against the same by the firm. Their further case was that the inverse of what is provided in Section 92 is permitted as not being prohibited or restricted; however, the contention of the Plaintiffs is held to be misconceived as this would defeat the intention of the legislature and would rather amount to do legislation in favour of the Plaintiffs. The law as it stands today provides a clear mechanism and the principle of taxation which has to be applied on the firm, whereas, nothing could be read into the said provision . It is settled law that the function of the Courts is only to expound and not to the legislate. In view of such position, all Suits have been dismissed by holding that the firm i.e. the Plaintiff No. 1 in all these Suits was required to file its return and pay the tax accordingly; and not the partners individually in respect of the income received from the association of persons or the firm; and once the tax is paid by the firm, then the partners are not required to pay any tax on such income.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 09-AUG-19
Approved for Reporting


413) 5196/2017 Const. P. SESSI United Staff Union sindh (CBA) & ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Sindh Employees??? Social Security Institution--vacant posts in SESSI were required to be filled through the competitive process--Before parting with this order, we may observe that the appointment in the public office can only be made through the competitive process on merit as provided under the recruitment rules and not otherwise as discussed supra. It is well-settled law that appointments in public office are to be made strictly under applicable rules and regulations without any discrimination and in a transparent manner. Thus, all appointments in the public institution must be based on a process that is substantially and tangibly fair and within the parameters of its applicable rules, regulations, and bylaws. However, if the candidate has applied based on such admissible quota under the law he can be accommodated subject to his qualification for the post under the dicta laid down by the Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan on the subject issue--
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 23-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


414) 919/2018 Const. P. Pir Bux & another (Petitioner) V/S Fed: of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 15-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2605/2018 Sikandar Ali Abro v. The Chairman NAB and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


415) 1661/2015 Suit Dewan Steel Mills and others (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan and another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Anti Dumping Law
Tag Line:Ant- Dumping Case: Concept of dumping explained. Section 31 Anti Dumping Act, 2015, explained. NTC not required to first give an independent decision or determination before delivering its preliminary determination. Concession of parties cannot confer jurisdiction on a Court. Suit barred in view of Section 70 of the Anti Dumping Act, 2015. Confidentiality issue to be considered by Appellate Forum. Information and database about prices of a product obtained from Customs Department, not confidential, unless otherwise barred by any statute or rule. Decisions of National Tariff Commission should not be resulting in creating directly or indirectly any monopoly or cartel of any business. Claim of confidentiality should be decided on the touchstone of Article 19A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, and Freedom of Information Ordinance, 2002. Role of National Tariff Commission is very significant vis-a-vis CPEC. NTC to ensure that local industry is not destroyed. Time enlarged for filing Appeal before the Appellate Authority. Case referred to National Tariff Commission.
Citation:2018 PTD 668
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 02-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting


416) 151/2017 Const. P. Sahoo (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 16-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


417) 104/2001 Cr.Rev Muhammad Akram S/o Muhammad Salim (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 15-JAN-18
Approved for Reporting


418) 2546/2020 Const. P. Aftab Ahmed Mahar (Petitioner) V/S The Speaker Provincial Assembly and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Petitioner has questioned his repatriation from the Secretariat of the Provincial Assembly of Sindh to his parent department i.e. Education Department, Government of Sindh --In view of the above, petitioner is liable to return the entire amount received by him during the entire said period towards differential in the pay scale of BPS-9 to BPS-19 and respondents are duty-bound to recover such amount from him and deposit the same in the Government exchequer. The Secretary Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh, respondent No.2 / Secretary Provincial Assembly of Sindh and Accountant General Sindh, are jointly and severally directed to calculate the differential amount recoverable from the petitioner and to submit a statement in this behalf through MIT-II of this Court, without fail within eight (08) weeks from today.
Topic: Service matters (Repatriation)
Tag Line:Petitioner has questioned his repatriation from the Secretariat of the Provincial Assembly of Sindh to his parent department i.e. Education Department, Government of Sindh --In view of the above, petitioner is liable to return the entire amount received by him during the entire said period towards differential in the pay scale of BPS-9 to BPS-19 and respondents are duty-bound to recover such amount from him and deposit the same in the Government exchequer. The Secretary Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh, respondent No.2 / Secretary Provincial Assembly of Sindh and Accountant General Sindh, are jointly and severally directed to calculate the differential amount recoverable from the petitioner and to submit a statement in this behalf through MIT-II of this Court, without fail within eight (08) weeks from today.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 20-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1879/2020 Aftab Ahmed Mahar v. Speaker Provincial Assembly of Sindh, Karachi & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


419) 460/2018 Criminal Appeal THE STATE / ANF (Appellant) V/S NADEEM BAHADUR (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput
Order Date: 23-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.A.11-K/2021 The State/Anti Narcoties Forec v. Nadeem Bahadur,Crl.P.199-K/2020 The State/Anti Narcoties Forec v. Nadeem Bahadur Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending ,Disposed Leave Granted


420) 1325/1999 Suit CHINA INT. WATER & ELECTRIC CORP. (Plaintiff) V/S PAK. WATER & POWER (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 CLC 188
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 12-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting


421) 192/2017 Cr.Rev MOHSIN ABBASS S/O ABDUL REHMAN S (Applicant) V/S QADIR KHAN MANDOKHAIL & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Criminal Procedure Code
Tag Line:Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 200, 203, 435 & 439---Private complaint, dismissal of---Revision against order of Judicial Magistrate---Maintainability---Procedure---Held, order having been passed under S.203, Cr.P.C., whereby direct complaint had been dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate without framing a charge and trial, it could not be treated as acquittal of the accused/respondents---Order under S.203 Cr.P.C, being an order passed by a court inferior to the Court of Session, the propriety demanded that the same should first be examined by the Sessions Judge for the purpose of satisfying itself to the correctness, legality or propriety of the said order passed by the Magistrate who was covered by the explanation given at the bottom of S.435, Cr.P.C.---Revision before the High Court being without exhausting the remedy available to the applicant was not maintainable---Matter was sent to the Sessions Judge for a just and fair decision on the grievance of the applicant---Revision application was thus disposed of accordingly.
Citation:2020 PLD Sindh 94
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 12-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


422) 5262/2013 Const. P. M/s Inland Textile Mills Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Mehdi Khan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Salary)
Citation:2019 PLC Lab. 182
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 16-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


423) 138/2012 Cr.Appeal Mst Tabish (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 31-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


424) 119/2006 Suit MRS. SHABEENA FARHAT (Appellant) V/S V/S M/S HIGHWAY HOUSING PROJECT & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Defendant has neither provided basic amenities in the Housing Scheme nor has produced any document, rules / bye-laws or Agreement between the parties hereto, to substantiate its evidence, that it is not the responsibility of Defendant to provide these basic amenities. the subject Housing Project launched by Defendant was not complete at least till the time of giving evidence till September, 2014; thus, the grievance of Plaintiff is of continuing nature, inter alia, in terms of Section 23 of the Limitation Law. This is a further ground in addition to the above, for determining that the present lis is maintainable. Hence, suit partly decreed.
Topic: Transfer of Property Act 1882
Tag Line:Defendant has neither provided basic amenities in the Housing Scheme nor has produced any document, rules / bye-laws or Agreement between the parties hereto, to substantiate its evidence, that it is not the responsibility of Defendant to provide these basic amenities. the subject Housing Project launched by Defendant was not complete at least till the time of giving evidence till September, 2014; thus, the grievance of Plaintiff is of continuing nature, inter alia, in terms of Section 23 of the Limitation Law. This is a further ground in addition to the above, for determining that the present lis is maintainable. Hence, suit partly decreed.
Citation:2014 CLC 322
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 02-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting


425) 205/2019 II.A. Ms. Qaiser Jehan Begum Thr. Salman Hussain Memon (Appellant) V/S Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Specific Relief Act, , Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order VII R.11)
Tag Line: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)
Order Date: 30-APR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.815-K/2021 Amir Nisar v. Qaiser Jehan Begum & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


426) 1315/2006 Suit MUHAMMAD IQBAL (Plaintiff) V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 23-AUG-19
Approved for Reporting


427) 3816/2011 Const. P. Niaz Hussain & Ors (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
whether the private Respondents who are holding the present postings qualify to continue the office? Whether the Chief Minister, Sindh is/was competent under the Rule 5(4) (b) of the West Pakistan Civil Service (Executive Branch) Rules, 1964 to nominate person as Assistant Commissioner? Whether the Chief Minister is competent to grant exemption to the private respondents from qualifying in passing the Departmental Examination prescribed for the posts under reference for regularization and promotion of the private respondents?
Topic: Service matters (Quo warranto )
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 06-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4105/2019,C.P.4144/2019,C.P.622-K/2019,C.P.4410/2019 SCP Status:Pending ,Pending ,Disposed Disposed of,Pending


428) 2259/2020 Const. P. Nisar Ahmed Tarar & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 19-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


429) 4445/2013 Const. P. Aftab Ali (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Citation:2018 PLC (CS) Note 64
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 13-APR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1906/2017 Aftab Ali v. Federation of Pakistan, thr. Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Resources and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


430) 135/2012 Suit Independent Media Corporation Private Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Mr. Ali Azmat & another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 15-AUG-16
Approved for Reporting


431) 3150/2016 Const. P. M/s Jubilee Life Insurance (Petitioner) V/S V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar
Order Date: 22-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.37-K/2018 M/s Jubilee Life Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed for Non-Prosecution


432) 6611/2018 Const. P. Muhammad Ismail & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 17-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.498/2019 Muhammad Ismail Shaikh & others v. Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secretary, Karachi & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


433) 3/2012 Conf.Case The State (Appellant) V/S Danial alias Dani (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar
Order Date: 17-FEB-16
Approved for Reporting


434) 1579/2020 Const. P. Indus Motor Co. (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Primacy of charging section.
Citation:2021 PTD 460
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 22-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.410-K/2021 The Commissioner Inland Revenue v. M/s. Indus Motors Company Limited Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


435) 562/2012 Const. P. Nabeela Ashfaq (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PLC (CS) 24
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 07-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


436) 1039/2018 Suit Pakistan National Shipping Corporation & others (Plaintiff) V/S M/s. Coniston Limited & another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: International Law, Anti Suit Injunction
Tag Line:Specific Relief Act. Section 42 and 56. Anti-Injunction Suit concept - can only be granted in rare exceptional cases- grant of such an Injunction amounts to transgressing norms of Judicial restraint.
Citation:2020 CLC 454
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 25-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


437) -9/2018 Suit Muhammad Afzal (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 02-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


438) 102/2020 Criminal Appeal Gulab (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 25-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


439) 1107/2014 Suit Work Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (Plaintiff) V/S Province of Sindh & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 01-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


440) 333/2016 H.C.A Delhi Mercantile Muslim Cooperative Housing Society Limited Karachi (Appellant) V/S Alamgir Welfare Trust International and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 YLR 1167
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 10-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


441) 985/2013 Const. P. Mst. Roshan Ara Begum (Petitioner) V/S Executive Officer & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 30-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


442) 2067/2016 Suit M/s. Getz Pharma (Pvt.) Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Through this Suit all Plaintiffs had sought exemption on the packing material imported by them for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products in terms of entry No. 105 of the 6th Schedule to the Sales Tax Act, 1990; however, the said entry only caters for ???raw material??? and not for ???packing material??? therefore, the Suits of the Plaintiffs have been dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 02-AUG-19
Approved for Reporting


443) 762/1995 Suit SHAHZAB GOTH RESIDENTS (Plaintiff) V/S GOVT. OF SINDH & ORS. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 21-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


444) 2587/2021 Const. P. Iltaf Hussain & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 20-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


445) 7450/2018 Const. P. Imran Ahmed Khanzada & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:I. Whether respondent No.4 can hold the charge for the post of Director I.T. in BPS-18 under the law? II. Whether respondent No.4???s case falls within the ambit of Section 3 of the Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013?
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


446) 20/2015 H.C.A Syed Arif Ali & another (Appellant) V/S Zeenat Hanif Siddiqui & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 SBLR Sindh 1227
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed
Order Date: 26-APR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.366-K/2017 Mrs. Zeenat Hanif Siddiqui v. Syed Arif Ali and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


447) 346/2019 Suit Syed Khaliluddin (Plaintiff) V/S Rafiq Ahmed Qandhari & others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 23-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


448) 664/2008 Suit MRS. SAKINA SULEMAN (Plaintiff) V/S MUHAMMAD ARIF JANJUA (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 24-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


449) 8542/2018 Const. P. Sukkur Beverages (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 CLD 110
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


450) 1957/2018 Const. P. Mst Afsheen (Petitioner) V/S Province Of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Protection to Women, children, vulnerable persons in cases of domestic violence.
Tag Line:Protection, Women, children, vulnerable persons, destitute, domestic violence, welfare of minors, mechanism, safe houses, Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2013,
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 07-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.387-K/2019 Makhdoom Mehmood Rehman v. Province of Sindh thr. Home Secy: Govt. of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


451) 1682/2009 Suit MAZHAR SAYEED (Plaintiff) V/S ATIF MAZHAR & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 23-JAN-19
Approved for Reporting


452) 209/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Alman and others (Petitioner) V/S Secretary Revenue & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 14-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


453) 2839/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Azeem (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and otehrs (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 21-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


454) 3/2017 Election Appeal Jam Javed Ahmed Khan Dehar (Appellant) V/S Haji Muhammad Akbar and 14 others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 13-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


455) 569/2017 Const. P. Ghulam Rasoom Bhagat (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 08-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting


456) 234/2009 Cr.Misc. Kamran Ellahi (Applicant) V/S The State & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 18-AUG-10
Approved for Reporting


457) 7004/2015 Const. P. Syed Umer Baqi and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 19-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting


458) 395/2006 Const. P. Israr Ul Haq & Ors (Appellant) V/S Mst. Zohra Jabeen & Ors (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Abdullah Chandio(ADVO-1763-SBC-KHI),Qaiser Hassan Khan()
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 27-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


459) 68/2015 Const. P. Sherbaz Khan Rind And ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 23-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.881-K/2018 M/s Sui Southern Gas Company Limited and another v. Sherbaz Khan Rind and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


460) 5144/2015 Const. P. Dr. Iltaf Hussain and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:they have prayed that their temporary contractual appointments/services be regularized in respondent-Water and Power Development Authority (`WAPDA`) without discrimination, with a further assertion that they have already served in WAPDA for a considerable period and they have the legitimate expectation for appointment on regular basis rather than joining fresh process with other candidates--
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 28-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


461) 1644/2013 Suit Sheikh Muhammad Javaid (Plaintiff) V/S Sartaj Saqlain and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order 1 Rule 10 CPC)
Tag Line:(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 17 & 79---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 113 & S. 22---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. I, R. 10---Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984), Ss. 290 & 309---Suit for specific performance of contract---Impleadment of party during pendency of suit---Limitation, commencement of---Agreement to sell by the Directors of a private limited company---Effect---Document---Proof---Procedure---Private limited company was impleaded as one of the defendants during pendency of suit on 07-09-2015---Suit against the said defendant was to be deemed to have been instituted from the date when company was impleaded as defendant---Plaintiff had stated in the plaint that cause of action had accrued on 26-08-2011---Present suit was time barred against newly impleaded defendant private limited company---Remaining defendants were not owners of the suit property---Suit to compel the said defendants to execute sale in favour of plaintiff was not maintainable---Plaintiff was bound to prove execution of agreement to sell with the lawful owner of suit property---Alleged agreement to sell was not executed by the company or any duly authorized person by the company in accordance with law---Managing Directors of a company had to act on the basis of authorization by the Board of Directors of company or on the basis of its Articles of Association---Even plaint/suit on behalf of a company could not be filed by the Director of a company for its benefit without proper authorization---Nothing was on record with regard to any meeting of the company to propose sale of its property---Even sale consideration was not paid to the company---Immovable property owned by a private limited company could not be sold by its Director---Suit property remained to be the property of company in the record of Security and Exchange Commission of Pakistan---Documents including alleged agreement to sell appeared to be forged and fabricated---Even legal heirs of Director of company could not step into the shoes of Director on his/her death to deal with the assets of a private limited company---Suit property belonged to a private limited company and possession of plaintiff on the suit property was result of fraud and mismanagement of the assets of private limited company---Plaintiff had not produced any of the marginal witnesses of agreement to sell and payment receipts---Photocopy of document was inadmissible in evidence---Business of registered company was to be transacted through Bank account held by the said company---Any transaction by or between the third party with any person who was even Director of company could not be treated as transaction binding on the company itself---Plaintiff had failed to establish contract with the lawful owner of suit property---Plaintiff had made attempt to misuse the process of court on the basis of forged documents---Court was bound to protect such immovable property owned by the company---Company had abandoned its business and its property should be dealt with in accordance with law---Suit property could only be protected or disposed of by winding-up of the company for the benefits of its affectees, if any---Security and Exchange Commission of Pakistan was directed to initiate proceedings against the company and wind-up the same---Nazir of the High Court was directed to inspect the suit property and take over possession of entire suit property till final order by the Court---Member Inspection Team was directed to examine affidavit filed by the plaintiff in his examination-in-chief on oath and file a complaint against him if any case was made out---Suit was dismissed in circumstances. Bashir Dawood v. Haji Suleman Goawala and Sons Ltd. and others 2010 CLC 191 rel.
Citation:2018 CLC 1676, 2018 CLD 1237
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 17-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


462) 263/2016 H.C.A The Collector Model Customs Collectorate & others (Appellant) V/S M/s. Naveena Industries Ltd. & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 03-AUG-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.1204/2017,C.A.1200/2017,C.A.1206/2017,C.A.1205/2017,C.A.1201/2017,C.A.1198/2017,C.A.1202/2017,C.A.1242/2017,C.A.1199/2017,C.A.1505/2017,C.A.1255/2017,C.A.1504/2017,C.A.1508/2017,C.A.1512/2017,C.A.1211/2017,C.A.1232/2017,C.A.1236/2017,C.A.1506/2017,C.A.1510/2017,C.A.1514/2017,C.A.1209/2017,C.A.1213/2017,C.A.1233/2017,C.A.1507/2017,C.A.1511/2017,C.A.1515/2017,C.A.1210/2017,C.A.1214/2017,C.A.1231/2017,C.A.1509/2017,C.A.1513/2017,C.A.1503/2017,C.A.1502/2017,C.A.1230/2017,C.A.1234/2017,C.A.1179/2017,C.A.1218/2017,C.A.1216/2017,C.A.1217/2017,C.A.1215/2017,C.A.1208/2017,C.A.1212/2017,C.A.1203/2017,C.A.1207/2017 SCP Status:Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed


463) 206/2008 Const. P. Hussain Developers (Petitioner) V/S Ist Senior Civil Judghe Karachi South (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 26-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.89-K/2018 Hussain Developers v. Yousuf Moulvi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


464) 846/2015 Const. P. CDR (R) Mansoob Ali Khan (Petitioner) V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Bar of Jurisdiction )
Citation:2019 CLC 1444
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aziz-ur-Rehman, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.336-K/2019 CDR (Retd) Mansoob Ali Khan v. Federation of Pakistan and others,C.A.25-K/2019 CDR (Retd) Mansoob Ali Khan v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted, Dismissed.Leave granting order is recalled.C.P is Dismissed.


465) 5220/2016 Const. P. Works Cooperative Housing Society (Petitioner) V/S Government of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 03-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.707-K/2018 Works Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


466) 252/2009 Const. P. Filters Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Board of Revenue & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 26-JUL-10
Approved for Reporting


467) 6708/2014 Const. P. Dr. Mumtaz Ali Shar & 3 others (Petitioner) V/S The Federation of Pakistan and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 30-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1782/2017 Dr. Mumtaz Ali Shar and others v. The Federation of Pakistan, thr. its Secretary, M/o Petroleum and Natural Resources and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


468) 1057/2018 Const. P. Board of Secondary Education (Petitioner) V/S Provincial Ombudsman Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 CLC 1531
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting


469) 76/2018 I. A Muhammad Ahmed Siddiqui & another (Appellant) V/S Abdul Abid Advocate & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 PLD Pesh. Note 1, 2021 SBLR Sindh Note 77
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 30-JUL-20
Approved for Reporting


470) 842/2020 Const. P. Adeela Saeed Sheikh D/o Hafiz Muhammad Saeed Sheik (Petitioner) V/S Saad Mahmood Sherani and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 15-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


471) 365/1994 Suit SALEEM AHMED MIRZA (Plaintiff) V/S RETD. MAJOR SYED IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN ZAIDI (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Declaration and Permanent Injunction), Civil Procedure Code CPC
Tag Line:Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 42 & 8---Suit for declaration, possession, mesne profits and damages---Contention of plaintiff was that he was owner of suit land whose possession had been taken by the defendants forcibly---Validity---Plaintiff had established that he was owner of suit property---Possession of defendants upon the suit land could not be lawful---Unlawful occupant of suit property could only be termed as "trespasser"---No fraud had been committed in leasing the suit property in favour of plaintiff---Plaintiff had been denied to enjoy ownership right in the plot in question and he was entitled to mesne profit @ Rs. 500/ per day from the date of illegal possession of defendants---No documentary evidence had been produced to justify the claim of damages, therefore same could not be awarded on account of increase in cost of construction material---Plaintiff was declared lawful owner of suit land and he was entitled for vacant possession from defendants and mesne profits jointly and severally---Suit was decreed in circumstances.
Citation:2015 YLR 196
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 13-MAR-14
Approved for Reporting


472) 1244/2006 Const. P. Mustafa F. Ansari (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 04-AUG-17
Approved for Reporting


473) 2115/2014 Const. P. Mansoor and another (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 17-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


474) 2925/2011 Const. P. Sardar Amin Farooqi and ors (Petitioner) V/S Director I & I FBR and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 08-DEC-11
Approved for Reporting


475) 47/2009 II.A. Ghazi Naseem & Ors (Appellant) V/S Moulana Muhammad Bilal Somayri & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 15-FEB-10
Approved for Reporting


476) 426/2019 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. United Refrigeration Industires Ltd. (Applicant) V/S Director D I&I-FBR (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 08-APR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.830-K/2021 Director, Directorate General Intelligence & Investigation (Customs) v. United Refrigeration Industries Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


477) 2543/2011 Const. P. Mansur-ul-Haque (Petitioner) V/S Government of Pakistan and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Back benefits)
Citation:2017 PLC (CS) 1255
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 17-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.313-K/2017 Mansoor-ul-Haque v. Govt. of Pakistan thr. its Secy: M/o Defence and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


478) 1141/2009 Const. P. M/S EFU General Insurance Ltd. (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 08-MAR-10
Approved for Reporting


479) 141/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Usman (Petitioner) V/S PTCL and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Pakistan Telecommunication (Reorganization) Act, 1996, Pakistan Telecommunication Corporation Act, 1991, Civil Servants Act, 1973, Constitution of Pakistan
Tag Line: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.
Citation:2020 PLC (CS) 895
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 19-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


480) 733/2017 Const. P. Faqirullah (Petitioner) V/S D.G Pakistan Public and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 SBLR Sindh 720
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 16-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.947-K/2018 Faqirullah v. The Director General Pakistan Public Works Department, Ibd and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


481) 37/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Mithal (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 14-JAN-19
Approved for Reporting


482) 20/2007 Spl.Cr.A.T.A. Party-1 (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 26-JAN-10
Approved for Reporting


483) 703/2010 Const. P. Abdul Qadir (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Amenity Plot (Conversion of amenity plot into Residential / commercial), Amenity Plot (Allowed)
Tag Line:The action of Respondent No.3 in changing amenity nature and use of reserved plots is void ab initio. Consequently, very allotment in favour of private Respondents has no sanctity in the eyes of law and it is also settled principle that transferor cannot transfer a better title then what he himself possesses, therefore, if the title of the private Respondents being purported allottees of the above subject Plots is defective then further transfers of these plots do not improve the legal status of these allottees / private Respondents vis-??-vis the respective newly created purported Plots No.261 to 265 or any other Plot(s) created / allocated in a land exclusively earmarked / reserved for amenity purpose(s).
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 26-SEP-17
Approved for Reporting


484) 1054/2018 Const. P. Ishrat Ali Lohar (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 PLD 47, 2018 SBLR 1367
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar
Order Date: 23-APR-18
Approved for Reporting


485) 41/2019 M.A. Roshan Ara and others Thr. Yasir Ali Palijo (Appellant) V/S Abdul Karim and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925) --- ----Ss. 372, 373 & 295---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 85 & 128---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 42---Succession certificate, issuance of---Public document---Presumption of truth---Legitimacy of a child---Proof---DNA test, conducting of---Respondents being sisters of deceased filed application for conducting DNA test of minor son of deceased with the contention that he was adopted son and was not entitled for inheritance---Petition for conducting DNA test and objections were dismissed and succession certificate was issued in favour of petitioners---Validity---Documents produced on behalf of petitioners were official which had not been disputed by the respondents---Respondents should have sought declaration and cancellation of said documents before raising objections to the legal status of minor after death of his mother---Legitimacy of a child or his status as son of deceased could not be disproved by any oral evidence as against documentary evidence from official record which was a public document---Civil Court in presence of documentary evidence could not hold that the child was not born from the marriage of the parties---Father, in the present case, had not challenged that deceased was not mother of the minor son---Respondents had failed to challenge or rebut the evidence of official record of National Database and Registration Authority and other evidence before the Trial Court---DNA test could not be a sole proof of paternity of a child---Trial Court had rightly refused request of respondents for conducting DNA test, in circumstances---Respondents had made a frivolous challenge to the paternity of a child to deprive him from inheritances---Appeal was dismissed in, circumstances. 2012 YLR 1752 distinguished. Mst. Laila Qayyum v. Fawad Qayum and others PLD 2019 SC 449; Salman Akram Raja v. Government of Punjab 2013 SCMR 203 and Ghazala Tehsin Zohra v. Ghulam Dastagir Khan PLD 2015 SC 327 rel.
Citation:2020 CLC 1670
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 03-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


486) 199/2015 S.M.A Sheikh Haroon Buksh S/o Shaikh Buksh Elahi (Plaintiff) V/S Shaikh Tahir Buksh & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Succession Act
Tag Line:Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925)--- ----Ss. 295 & 278---Chief Court (Sindh) Rules (OS), Chap. XXII, R.413---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XX, R.13 & S.114---Succession---Procedure in contentious cases---Decree in administration suit---Nature of order under S.295 of the Succession Act, 1925---Conversion of proceedings under Succession Act, 1925 to a suit of administration under O. XX, R.13, C.P.C.---Petitioner sought review of order passed by High Court under S.295 of the Succession Act, 1925, whereby in view of contentious nature of succession proceedings, application seeking issuance of letters of administration were converted into a civil suit--- Contention of applicant inter alia was that impugned order, which converted proceedings into suit for administration and stated that the preliminary decree be passed was contrary to law; and the suit should be regular suit and not a suit for administration---Validity---Impugned order identified the parties and identified as to who should be the plaintiff and defendant and mentioned that the suit would be in the form of a suit for administration of the properties of the deceased and therefore all ingredients of S.295 of the Succession Act, 1925 and O.XX, C.P.C. were fully adhered to---When parties were legal heirs of the deceased and were contesting with regard to share in property left by the deceased, in such situation any one of the legal heirs could file a suit for administration of properties or file an application under S.278 of the Succession Act, 1925 for grant of "letter of administration" and in terms of S.295 of the Succession Act, 1925 in the case where there was contention, then proceedings were supposed to be converted as nearly as they could be, into a "regular suit" according to provisions of the C.P.C.---Court in the impugned order exercised powers of a court of original civil jurisdiction and once an order was passed, the court also had power to take further steps to minimize delay in disposal of dispute and the court was under a statutory obligation to pass an order for preliminary decree---Use of the word "shall" in O.XX, R.13, C.P.C. was of mandatory nature, and the C.P.C. did not envisage any other form a suit except for a suit for administration of properties under O.XX, C.P.C.---No error on the face of record was found in the impugned order---Review application was rejected, in circumstances.
Citation:2017 PLD 563
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 10-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


487) 3337/2013 Const. P. Zaheer Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Director General of Intelligence and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 11-JUN-14
Approved for Reporting


488) 422/2012 Const. P. Hafizullah & ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed: of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4655/2018,C.P.574/2019,C.A.1125/2019,C.A.1127/2019 SCP Status:Disposed Leave Granted , stay,Disposed Leave Granted , stay,Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed.CMAs are also Disposed of.,Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed.CMAs are also Disposed of.


489) 2991/2013 Const. P. Ali Asghar and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)
Citation:2018 SBLR Sindh 682
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 22-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.441-K/2017 Sindh Madaressatul Islam University (SMIU) v. Ali Asghar and others,C.A.62-K/2018 Sindh Madaressatul Islam University (SMIU) v. Ali Asghar and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed,Disposed


490) 46/2020 Criminal Appeal Aijaz Ali (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 27-AUG-20
Approved for Reporting


491) 727/2008 Suit BAYER AG and Bayer Health Care AG (Plaintiff) V/S Bayhealth Care (Private) Limited & another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 27-MAY-13
Approved for Reporting


492) 3408/2013 Const. P. Zafar Iqbal Zahid and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 882
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 05-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.554-K/2018,C.P.555-K/2018,C.P.559-K/2018,C.P.562-K/2018,C.P.560-K/2018,C.P.553-K/2018,C.P.557-K/2018,C.P.558-K/2018,C.P.556-K/2018,C.P.561-K/2018 SCP Status:Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed


493) 3026/2015 Const. P. Muhammad Waris (Petitioner) V/S E.O.B.I (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Retired employees/family members of a deceased employee of the Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PTCL) and claiming a certain amount of contribution on account of Employees Old-Age Benefits--The petitioners are claiming the pensionary benefits under the EOB Act, 1976. We have to see whether petitioners were paid full-service benefits under the VSS scheme introduced by respondent-company in 2008 or are entitled to the issuance of EOBI Cards?--Adverting to the point raised by the petitioners that the respondent-PTCL deposited the requisite contribution with EOBI as such they are entitled to the benefits. We do not agree with the aforesaid proposition for the reason that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PTCL as discussed supra directed the respondent-PTCL to pay such contribution under the provision of Employees? Old-Age Benefits Act, 1976, and as per the statement of the respondent-PTCL such demand of respondent No.2 was fully satisfied from the relevant period, whereas petitioners during their tenure of service never contributed such EOBI amount to respondent No.2 for payment before their voluntary retirement. However, we may observe that if the petitioners would not have opted for VSS Scheme, the position of the case would have been different for the simple reason that after their option of VSS, they are estopped to claim such benefits---Dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 16-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


494) 7142/2017 Const. P. Mumtaz Ali Magsi (Petitioner) V/S I.G Police and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


495) 261/2007 Suit SM SHOAIB BAGHPATI (Plaintiff) V/S UMER GUL AND OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 01-DEC-14
Approved for Reporting


496) 5205/2020 Const. P. Prof: Dr. Muhammad Zahid (Petitioner) V/S Chancellor of Fed: Urdu University & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P. No.D-5205 of 2020 challenging the appointment of Search Committee and its members for the appointment of Vice Chancellor of Federal Urdu University of Arts, Sciences and Technology (FUUAST).
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 28-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


497) 764/2013 Const. P. Muhkamuddin Metlo & others (Petitioner) V/S Province & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed
Order Date: 18-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.663-K/2015 The Province of Sindh and others v. Mukhamuddin Metlo and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


498) 68/2014 Cr.Appeal ZULIFQAR ALI KACHELO @ ALI & 03 ORS (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 28-JUN-14
Approved for Reporting


499) 3/2021 M.A. M/s. Jiangsu Dajin Heavy Industry Co. Limited (Appellant) V/S Port Qasim Authority (PQA) and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: General Clauses Act, 1897 (Section 24A), PPRA Rules, 2004 (Rule 36), PPRA Rules, 2004 ( Rule 25, 29, 30 and 31)
Tag Line:- 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.
Citation:2021 CLC 1931
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 03-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


500) 8125/2018 Const. P. Pakistan Minerals Developement Corporation (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Mines and Minerals, CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973
Tag Line:Petitioner, Pakistan Mineral Development Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd administrative control of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources. In respect of an area of 3818.81 acres at Lakhra, District Jamshoro, for which a mining-lease was granted to the Petitioner for mining coal for a period of thirty[30] years. These renewal applications remained pending with the Respondent No.2, and though in the meantime both the mining-leases of the Petitioner expired in April 2015, the date of such expiry stood extended .Respondent No.2 had granted mining-permits to SLCMC without waiting for a decision on the Petitioner???s appeals pending under Rule 71 of the SMC Rules. Mr. Jawad Dero, the learned AAG Sindh, and Mr. Jaffar Raza, learned counsel for SLCMC had objected to the maintainability of these fresh petitions on the ground that the Hyderabad Petitions for the same relief were still pending. we agree with Barrister Zameer Ghumro that these petitions cannot be held to be not-maintainable merely on the ground that the Hyderabad Petitions are also pending. Appellate Authority manifests that the refusal to renew the Petitioner mining-leases was only for the reason that the Petitioner was Federal Government entity and the Government of Sindh had already made up its mind to award a mining concession in the same area to the SLCMC, a company wholly owned by the Government of Sindh. Having found no reason to interfere in the discretion exercised by the Respondent No.2 The petitions succeed for prayer clause 3 in terms that the impugned Notifications dated 09-07-2018 granting mining permits to SLCMC (Respondent No.3) having been granted in contravention of Rule 68 of the SMC Rules, the same are without lawful authority and are therefore set-aside judgment shall be dispatched by the office to o be placed in C.P. No. D-7643/2018 pending before this Court at Karachi The petitions stand disposed off.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 22-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2795/2019 M/s Sindh Lakhra Coal Mining Company (Pvt) Ltd v. Pakistan Mineral Development Corporation thr. its Project Director & others,C.P.443-K/2019 Province of Sindh thr. Secy: Energy Department, Govt. of Sindh and another v. Pakistan Mineral Development Corporation and another,C.A.1539/2019 M/s Sindh Lakhra Coal Mining Company (Pvt) Ltd v. Pakistan Mineral Development Corporation thr. its Project Director & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Pending Not Reached,Pending Not Reached


501) 1528/2020 Const. P. Aijaz Hussain Jakhrani (Petitioner) V/S National Accountability Bureau through its Chairman (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Tag Line:National Accountability Ordinance, 1999
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 16-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


502) 5141/2017 Const. P. Dr. Gul Hassan Dahri and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Sindh Public Service Commission and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 01-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


503) 1000/2020 Cr.Bail Nabi Bux (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Saleem Jessar(Author)
Order Date: 02-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


504) 2722/2018 Const. P. Abdul Hameed Solangi and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PLC (CS) 345
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 17-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2377/2018 Abdul Hameed Solangi & others v. Government of Sindh thr. Secretary Education & Litreracy Department, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn.CMA.1027/2020 for withdrawal is Allowed


505) 1761/2008 Suit Mst. Shagufta Noor (Plaintiff) V/S Defendant (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2012 CLC 1902
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 06-AUG-12
Approved for Reporting


506) 100/2013 Const. P. Nafees Fatima (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.357-K/2019 Pakistan Telecommunication Company Ltd. and another v. Nafees Fatima and others,C.P.365-K/2019 Pakistan Telecommunication Employees Trust and another v. Nafees Fatima and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending ,Pending


507) 993/2020 Const. P. Kamla (Petitioner) V/S FED Of Pakistan & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 08-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


508) 755/2020 Const. P. Karim Bux Tanwri & Others (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Tag Line:Group Insurance Policy matures only on death; petitioners who are alive; retired and have crossed the age of 65 years are not entitled for refund or return of contribution made by them during service.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi
Order Date: 13-OCT-21
Approved for Reporting


509) 579/2015 Cr.Bail HAMOODUR REHMAN KHAN NIAZI & ANOTHER (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 19-OCT-15
Approved for Reporting


510) 5839/2015 Const. P. Arshad Noor Khan (Petitioner) V/S Government of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PLC (CS) 360
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 25-APR-18
Approved for Reporting


511) 5147/2017 Const. P. Mst. Yasmeen Akhtar and ors (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 14-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting


512) 6847/2019 Const. P. Wazeer Ali Khushk and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 19-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


513) -52/2016 Suit Allahdino & Others.. (Plaintiff) V/S H.H Shaikh Zaid Bin ultan Al-Nahyan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 09-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


514) 102/2019 Cr.Bail Abdul Rehman (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 08-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


515) 6309/2018 Const. P. Muhammad Naeem Akhtar Khan (Petitioner) V/S NIRC & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:we queried from the learned counsel for the Petitioner as to how this Petition is maintainable in its form against the National Command Authority (NCA) under the National Command Authority (Amendment) Act, 2016; besides that SUPARCO, comes under the definition of NCA as provided under clause (A) of Section 2 of the NCA Act, 2010.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


516) 1111/2017 Suit Dr. Sulleman and another (Plaintiff) V/S Higher Education of Commission of Pakistan and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 14-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting


517) 1409/2001 Suit TRADING CORP. OF PAK. PVT. LTD. (Plaintiff) V/S M/S. COX & KING AGENTS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 29-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting


518) 2933/2014 Const. P. M/s Lucky Cement Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Doctrine of Election
Citation:2021 PTD 835
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 16-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


519) 1657/2020 Suit TCB AVIATION (PVT.) LIMITED (Plaintiff) V/S SRI LANKAN AIRLINES LTD THR. COUNTRY MANAGER (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 17-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


520) 1928/2016 Suit Mr. Mehtab Tahir Niazi (Plaintiff) V/S M/s Al-Qasmia Properties & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Asim Iqbal(ADVO-4488-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Shafi(ADVO-2185-SBC-KHC),Farman Ullah(ADVO-11315-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 04-AUG-21
Approved for Reporting


521) 2748/2009 Const. P. Malir Development Authority (Petitioner) V/S Prov. of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan
Order Date: 21-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


522) 9/2016 Civil Revision Ashfaque Hussain Lahori (Appellant) V/S Lal Bux Soomro and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito
Order Date: 21-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


523) 67/2007 H.C.A Muhammad Hussain Qureshi (Appellant) V/S Mrs Mumtaz Muzakkir & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 14-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.352-K/2019 Muhammad Faisal and another v. Mrs. Mumtaz Muzakkir and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


524) 6803/2018 Const. P. Mian Dad (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 28-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1102-K/2018 Mian Dad v. Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secy: Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


525) 7339/2017 Const. P. Independent Media Corp (Pvt) Ltd and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Raja Tariq Mehmood and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Contract employee)
Citation:2018 PLC Lab. Note 29
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 15-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.66-K/2018 M/s Independent Media Corporation (Pvt) Ltd and another v. Raja Tariq Mehmood and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


526) 4389/2016 Const. P. Lutfullah Kalhoro and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 01-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting


527) 4596/2021 Const. P. Employers Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Minimum Wages Act 2015 (Section 4), Sindh Minimum Wages Act 2015
Tag Line:Title Minimum Wages under the Sindh Minimum Wages Act 2015
Advocates:M/S. RASHID RAZVI & ASSOCIATES.(FIRM-104-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Zaheer ul Hassan(ADVO-8707-SBC-KHI),Rasheed A. Rizvi(ADVO-2131-SBC-KHI),Khalid Mahmood Siddiqui(ADVO-6801-SBC-KHI),Advocate General Sindh(ADVO-GEN-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 15-OCT-21
Approved for Reporting


528) 22/2017 F.R.A M/s. Pharmacie Plus (Appellant) V/S Abdul Latif & Another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 YLR 966
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 07-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.711-K/2018 Abdul Latif and another v. M/s Pharmacie Plus (Pvt) Ltd.,C.M.A.881-K/2018 Abdul Latif and another v. M/s Pharmacie Plus (Pvt) Ltd.,C.A.25-K/2018 Abdul Latif and another v. M/s Pharmacie Plus (Pvt) Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted, Notice in CMA.,Disposed Allowed,Disposed Allowed


529) 233/2007 Suit TRUSTEES OF PORT OF KARACHI. (Plaintiff) V/S M/S FATIMA SUGAR MILLS LTD. & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 02-MAR-11
Approved for Reporting


530) 16/2010 R.A (Civil Revision) Shahnawaz and another (Applicant) V/S Shabbir Ahmed Memon and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 18-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


531) 201/2012 Const. P. Mr. Abdul Rashid. (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Autority & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 19-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


532) 43/2013 Cr.Rev Shahrukh Jatoi (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 15-MAY-13
Approved for Reporting


533) 269/2014 H.C.A Hamdard Laboratories (Waqf) Pakistan (Appellant) V/S Mohammad Fahim (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 03-MAY-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1440/2016 Muhammad Faheem v. Hamdard Laboratories (Waqf) Pakistan, Karachi,C.M.A.5165/2016 Muhammad Faheem v. Hamdard Laboratories (Waqf) Pakistan, Karachi Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of,Disposed Allowed and Parent Case Restored but subject to payment of cost of Rs.50000.


534) 3993/2011 Const. P. M/S Akhter Textile Industries Ltd. (Petitioner) V/S Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal at Karachi (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 PLC Lab. 319
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Rasool Memon
Order Date: 13-FEB-14
Approved for Reporting


535) 1373/2018 Cr.Bail LUTUFULLAH S/O MAVAZ KHAN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Bail Matters (Bail After Arrest---497)
Citation:2018 MLD 794
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 29-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


536) 39/2007 Civil Revision Party-1 (Appellant) V/S Party-2 (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 22-MAY-13
Approved for Reporting


537) 233/2010 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Mustafa Ali Ladiwala (Applicant) V/S Collector of Customs & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 18-OCT-11
Approved for Reporting


538) 2728/2014 Const. P. Advance Telecom (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 PTD 462
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 22-SEP-14
Approved for Reporting


539) 690/2012 Cr.Bail Muhammad Shakir S/o M Sabir (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah
Order Date: 13-JUL-12
Approved for Reporting


540) 316/2019 Cr.Bail Ghulam Mujtaba son of Imam Din by caste Lakho (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-JUN-19
Approved for Reporting


541) 62/2010 H.C.A Muhammad Naved Aslam & Ors. (Appellant) V/S Mst.Aisha Siddiqui & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 24-DEC-10
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.166-K/2011 Muhammad Naveed Aslam and others v. Mst. Aisha Siddiqui and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


542) 43/2015 Cr.Bail Ismail (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 26-OCT-15
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.M.A.12-K/2017 Ismail v. The State through P. G. Sindh,Crl.P.76-K/2015 Ismail v. The State through P. G. Sindh Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of,Disposed Dismissed


543) 13/2018 I.T.R.A THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (Applicant) V/S M/S MSC SWITZERLAND GENEVA (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Implication of double taxation treaties upon super tax.
Citation:2021 PTD 885
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 12-APR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.672-K/2021 Commissioner Inland Revenue, Legal v. M/s. MSC Switzerland Geneva Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


544) 46/2015 Spl.Cr.A.T.A. Amjad Ali (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Ahmed Ali M. Shaikh, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Saleem Jessar
Order Date: 05-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


545) 5798/2014 Const. P. Anwery Begum (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Pension matters)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 572
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


546) 8179/2018 Const. P. Tariq Aziz (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 08-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.766/2019 Pakistan Medical & Dental Council, Islamabad thr. its Chairman v. Tariq Aziz & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


547) 326/2017 Const. P. Azizullah Khan Afridi (Petitioner) V/S The Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 CLC 170
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar
Order Date: 29-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


548) 855/2020 Const. P. Waheed Ali & Others (Petitioner) V/S Ghulam Nabi & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 24-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


549) 1546/2021 Const. P. Mst. Bilquees Khalid (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Cantonments Act 1924 (S.68)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 22-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


550) 709/2019 Const. P. Rab Dino (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Ehtram-e-Ramazan Ordinance, 1981 (Section 5)
Tag Line:Since in all the petition, the places mentioned does not fall within exemption given under section 5 of the Ordinance, therefore, all the petitions are dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 02-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


551) 651/2019 Cr.Misc. MUNTAZIR MEHDI (Applicant) V/S S.H.O P.S TANDO MUHAMMAD KGHAN & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 21-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.52-K/2021 Muntazir Mehdi v. The S.H.O P.S T.M. Khan & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


552) 1324/2015 Const. P. SSGC-LPG (PVT) LTD (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 28-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.525-K/2017 The Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Sui Southern Gas Company and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Barred by Time


553) 3100/2016 Const. P. Ms. Surriya Kanwal (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:whether the resignation once tendered by the civil servant voluntarily and accepted by the competent authority and communicated to him/her could be considered to be final and cannot be revoked afterwards?
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 29-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


554) 635/2018 Const. P. M/S Gerry (Petitioner) V/S Learned Member NIRC & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (transfer and posting)
Citation:2019 PLC Lab. 63
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 09-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.86-K/2018,C.P.84-K/2018,C.P.88-K/2018,C.P.83-K/2018,C.P.87-K/2018,C.P.85-K/2018 SCP Status:Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed


555) 3491/2013 Const. P. Lal Badshah And Ors (Petitioner) V/S Chairman K.P.T And Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Cost of Living Allowance (CLA) )
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1231
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 21-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.211-K/2020 The Chairman Karachi Port Trust (KPT) and another v. Lal Badshah and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Notice to Respondents


556) 310/2005 Cr.Appeal Muhammad Islam (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 16-SEP-15
Approved for Reporting


557) 195/2017 H.C.A Abdul Tauheed Khan (Appellant) V/S The Federation of Pakistan & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 10-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting


558) -819/2021 Suit SYED GHULAM SARWAR SHAH (Plaintiff) V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line: As a result of the above discussion, it is hereby held that the instant Suit is barred by limitation, and also under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, and Order VI Rule 4 CPC, and is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. Accordingly, the Suit is liable to be dismissed with costs. Foregoing are the reasons of the short order announced by me on 08.04.2021 whereby this Suit and the listed applications were dismissed with costs of Rs.100,000.00 (Rupees one hundred thousand only). The amount of costs shall be deposited by the plaintiff with the Nazir of this Court within thirty (30) days, which amount shall be transferred / deposited forthwith by the Nazir in the bank account of Edhi Foundation.
Advocates:Muhammad Ali Shaikh(ADVO-2056-SBC-HYD)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar(Author)
Order Date: 21-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


559) 133/1998 Suit MRS. PARVEEN MEHMOOD. (Plaintiff) V/S THAI AIRWAYS INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC CO. LT (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC
Advocates:SURRIDGE & BEECHENO(FIRM-101-SBC-KHI),Khalid Rehman(),Malik Muhammad Riaz(ADVO-6493-SBC-KHI),Sohail Mazaffar(ADVO-2086-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 02-AUG-21
Approved for Reporting


560) 29/2021 Cr.Rev MS.RUBINA MIR D/O LATE MIR MUHAMMAD (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Khawaja Shams ul Islam(ADVO-3953-SBC-KHI),Spl.Prosecutor Customs(SpPCus),Firdous Khatoon(ADVO-3796-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 16-JUL-21
Approved for Reporting


561) 5776/2018 Const. P. Dr. Imran Ali Hashmi (Petitioner) V/S The University of Karachi & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:University of Karachi--we deem it appropriate to set aside the findings of the Selection Board dated 28.06.2018 to the extent of petitioners and private respondents. Consequently, the matter is remanded to the competent authority of respondent-University to determine afresh as to whether the candidates i.e. petitioners and private respondents were having requisite academic qualifications duly recognized under the law for the subject posts in respondent-University, at the time of the cutoff date provided in the public notice dated 26.12.2014.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 10-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.582-K/2021 Dr.Erum Zahir v. Dr.Imran Ali Hashmi & others,C.P.733-K/2021 Dr.Masooda Qadri v. The University of Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned [ Status quo - before (3)HJJ ],Pending Adjourned [ Status quo - before (3)HJJ ]


562) 5/2005 Execution Mrs. Meher Rohinton Minwalla (Decree Holder) V/S S Darayus Cyrus Minwalla & Ors. (Judgment Debtor)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC
Tag Line:(a) Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S.)--- ----R. 50---Withdrawal of power of attorney by advocate of party---Effect---Applicant sought restoration of her execution petition which was dismissed after withdrawal of power of attorney by her advocate---Validity---Grievance of applicant was that intimation notice was issued to previous attorney after withdrawal of Vakalatnama---Issuance of notice to the attorney of applicant was not even required after compliance of notice under R.50 of Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S.)---Court had shown grace by issuing notice, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the Court could not ignore deliberate and wilful negligence of applicant herself in pursuing the case---Applicant failed to show bona fide in prosecuting her case with due diligence---High Court declined to restore execution petition---Application was dismissed in circumstances. Messrs United Bank Limited v. Messrs. Plastic Pack (Pvt.) Limited 2012 CLD 239; United Bank Limited v. The Chairman, Banking Tribunal-I, Lahore 1999 MLD 3267; Alamgir v. The State 1988 SCMR 642 distinguished. Bashir Ahmed v. Settlement of Rehabilitation Commissioner 1982 SCMR 188; Rafiq Ahmed v. Abdul Haleem 1982 SCMR 1229; Muhammad Rahim v. Mst. Begum Kaniz Fatima Hayat 1986 CLC 178 and Zulfiqar Ali v. Lal Din and others 1974 SCMR162 ref. (b) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 10-A---Right to fair trial---Scope---Provisions of Art.10-A of the Constitution are not for prosecutor to claim "fair trial and due process"---Protection of Art.10-A of the Constitution is available only to defendant and / or accused facing civil or criminal trial, as the case may be so that they may not be condemned unheard or treated unfairly in the process of adjudication.
Citation:2014 CLC 1312, 2014 SBLR 1021
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 29-JAN-14
Approved for Reporting


563) 108/2012 H.C.A P.T.C.L & another (Appellant) V/S Anjuman Falah-e-Behboud & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 PLC CS 510
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 31-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.313/2018 Pakistan Telecommunication Company Ltd, Karachi & another v. Anjuman Falah-e-Behboud, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned


564) 190/2011 Const. P. Pakistan Mobile Communication Ltd.,(MOBILINK) (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Stamp duty.
Citation:2021 SBLR Sindh 859
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 22-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


565) 203/2002 Suit ADVOCATE GENERAL SINDH (Plaintiff) V/S ISLAMIC EDUCATION TRUST & ORS. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 07-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting


566) 750/2009 Const. P. M/S Dewan Cement Ltd. (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan thr Sec Ministry of Finance and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 22-JUN-10
Approved for Reporting


567) 2217/2021 Const. P. Zeeshan Anjum and Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:The main grievance of the petitioners is that their candidature for the post of Police Constable (BPS-05) has been declined without announcing the final merit list i.e. written test and interview--Prima-facie, this petition is not maintainable for the simple reason that no offer of appointment order had been issued in their favor, thus no vested right had/has accrued in favor of the petitioners.
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


568) 2378/2017 Const. P. Shahzad Qamer Abbas (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 29-AUG-17
Approved for Reporting


569) 27/2016 F.R.A Nazimuddin (Applicant) V/S Mrs.Shahida and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan
Order Date: 07-SEP-16
Approved for Reporting


570) 6274/2017 Const. P. Bushra Jabeen and others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Ashraf Jehan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 03-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3854/2018,C.P.4573/2018,C.A.1486/2018,C.A.1487/2018,C.P.4475/2018,C.P.4476/2018 SCP Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Disposed ,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed


571) 3184/2021 Const. P. Tahira Haneef (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:In the light of the above discussion, in our view, a deputationist could not be treated as an aggrieved person, because she has no vested right to remain on a post as deputationist forever or for a stipulated period and can be repatriated at any time to her parent department more particularly in the light of aforesaid decisions of the Honorable Supreme Court. Reference is also made to the case of Dr. Shafi-ur-Rehman Afridi V/s CDA, Islamabad through Chairman and others (2010 SCMR 378). Even otherwise she cannot continue to serve on deputation in Sindh Government after her removal from service by the parent department, as discussed supra.
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 03-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


572) 584/2021 Suit DEEPAK KUMAR & OTHERS (Plaintiff) V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Muhammad Zeeshan Abdullah(ADVO-11819-SBC-KHI),Haider Waheed(ADVO-10131-SBC-KHE)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput(Author)
Order Date: 02-JUL-21
Approved for Reporting


573) 2378/2015 Const. P. Abdul Sattar (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 08-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


574) 2102/2017 Const. P. M/s Textilers (Pvt) Ltd and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Meezan Bank Ltd and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting


575) 127/2011 Adm. Suit Mulo Ahmed (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 06-MAY-11
Approved for Reporting


576) 2707/2019 Const. P. Shah Muhammad (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:the petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents to award him incentive of timescale i.e. BPS-17 to BPS-19, from the date of his entitlement; and, other ancillary benefits, to bring him at par with the employees of other departments of Government of Sindh--whether the petitioner is entitled to the incentive of the timescale from BPS-17 to BPS-19 under the law or otherwise.
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


577) 5879/2016 Const. P. M/s Tuwairqi Steel Mills (Petitioner) V/S 3rd SCJ kARACHI SOUTH (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Khadim Hussain(ADVO-4545-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 13-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting


578) 14/2015 I. A Nazli Hilal Rizvi (Appellant) V/S Bank Al-Falah Ltd. & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 CLD 808
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 13-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.381-K/2019 Nazli Hilal Rizvi v. Bank Al-Falah Ltd. and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


579) 121/2013 II.A. MAULANA SHABBIR AHMED (Appellant) V/S MUHAMMAD SHARIF MUGHAL & ANOTHER (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author)
Order Date: 13-JUN-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.1453/2018 Mualana Shabbir Ahmed Usmani v. Muhammad Sharif Mughal and another,C.P.981-K/2018 Mualana Shabbir Ahmed Usmani v. Muhammad Sharif Mughal and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of,Disposed Leave Granted


580) 185/2017 Civil Revision Muhammad Yousuf (Applicant) V/S Masood Ahmed (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 11-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


581) 5812/2015 Const. P. Shahrukh Shakeel Khan and others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:School Fees Judgement
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 07-OCT-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.7-K/2017,C.P.950-K/2016,C.P.865-K/2016,C.A.13-K/2017 SCP Status:Disposed Allowed,Disposed Leave Granted,Disposed Leave Granted,Disposed Allowed


582) 5891/2016 Const. P. Jalil ur Rehman & others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 26-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting


583) 3560/2016 Const. P. Rasool Bux Soho (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan
Order Date: 10-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.768/2018 Rasool Bux Soho v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau, Islamabad & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


584) 115/2012 Suit MEDIA MAX (PVT) LTD. (Plaintiff) V/S MEDIA MAX (PVT) LTD. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 PLD Sindh 555
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 26-JUN-13
Approved for Reporting


585) 5307/2015 Const. P. Mst. Nazima Khatoon (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Deceased quota)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 817
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


586) 328/2020 Criminal Miscelleneous MUHAMMAD YOUSUF KADANI (Applicant) V/S THE STATE & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 12-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


587) 197/2020 Cr.Bail SHEERAZ S/O IMAM BUX (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 MLD 292
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 04-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting


588) 1630/1998 Suit.B Northern Polythene Limited (NPL (Plaintiff) V/S National Bank of Pakistan and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 27-FEB-12
Approved for Reporting


589) 592/2020 Cr.Bail Shah Zaman Ashraf (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 24-AUG-20
Approved for Reporting


590) 3478/2018 Const. P. Bashir Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
the petitioner is seeking addition of the period, served with Civil Aviation Authority (`CAA`) on daily wages, against the substantive post of Storekeeper, with the period served as a regular employee, for the purpose of pensionary benefits---In view of the above discussion, this petition is allowed with no order as to costs and the respondents are directed to include daily wages employment of petitioner as his substantive service in regular for the purpose of service dues and other allied pensionary benefits. Respondents are further directed to complete the entire exercise and settle the service dues of the petitioner within sixty (60) days from the date of this judgment.
Topic: Service matters (Counting of previous service for pension)
Tag Line:the petitioner is seeking addition of the period, served with Civil Aviation Authority (`CAA`) on daily wages, against the substantive post of Storekeeper, with the period served as a regular employee, for the purpose of pensionary benefits---In view of the above discussion, this petition is allowed with no order as to costs and the respondents are directed to include daily wages employment of petitioner as his substantive service in regular for the purpose of service dues and other allied pensionary benefits. Respondents are further directed to complete the entire exercise and settle the service dues of the petitioner within sixty (60) days from the date of this judgment.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1661/2020 Civil Aviation Authority thr. its Chairman, Islamabad and others v. Bashir Ahmed and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


591) 446/2018 Const. P. Muhammad Ayoub Afridi (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 23-JAN-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.221-K/2019 Muhammad Ayoub Afridi v. Federation of Pakistan thr.Secy: Water & Power and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


592) 1080/2020 Const. P. M/s U & I Garments Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 03-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


593) 14/2013 Cr.Bail SYED OBAID AHMED THE STATE (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah
Order Date: 27-MAY-13
Approved for Reporting


594) 40/2014 Spl.Cr.Bail THE STATE (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 10-NOV-14
Approved for Reporting


595) 866/2017 Suit Hajj Organizaers Association of Pakistan & Others (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 MLD 1616
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 16-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting


596) 22/2014 I.T.R.A M/S AP MOllar Marersk (Applicant) V/S Commissioner Inland Revenue (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PTD 1614, 2021 PTCL 285
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.560-K/2019 Commissioner Inland Revenue Zone-IV, Karachi v. M/s A.P. Moller Maersk Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned


597) 3508/2018 Const. P. Riasat Ali and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:1. Pursuant to Article 129 of the Constitution, the executive authority of the Provincial Government is to be exercised by the Provincial Cabinet as a collective entity albeit in the name of the Governor. When a Provincial statute, such as the Sindh Agriculture University Act, 1977, provides for the exercise of executive authority by the Provincial Government, that is to be done and the decision for that has to be taken by the Provincial Cabinet and not by the Chief Minister alone. Rel: Mustafa Impex v. Government of Pakistan (PLD 2016 SC 808); Karamat Ali v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2018 Sindh 8); Mirpurkhas Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Province of Sindh, C.P. No.D-8591/2018. 2. Having seen that the word ???Government??? in section 27(1) of the Sindh Agriculture University Act, 1977, as it stood amended at the relevant time by the Sindh Universities and Institutes Laws (Amendment) Act, 2014, could only mean the ???Provincial Cabinet???, the decision to extend the tenure of the Respondent No.5 as Vice Chancellor for another term, and the terms and conditions of such extension, had to be taken by the Provincial Cabinet and not by the Chief Minister in isolation of the Provincial Cabinet.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 09-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


598) 183/2019 Const. P. Sindh Petroleum & CNG Dealers Association & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Unadjudicated recovery of default surcharge via a third party.
Citation:2021 PTD 713
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 11-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.521-K/2021 The Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Sindh Petroleum & CNG Dealers Association & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


599) 3550/2013 Const. P. Akhter Billoo (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Industrial Development Corporation and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi
Order Date: 11-APR-14
Approved for Reporting


600) 3238/2013 Const. P. Ghulam Ali Gopang (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Shaheed compensation)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1354
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 08-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


601) 2110/2009 Const. P. Muhammad Tariq Qasmi (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:EJECTMENT AND RECOVERY OF POSSESSION
Citation:2019 PLC CS 594
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 16-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


602) 1258/2010 Suit DR. ISHAQUE MUHAMMAD SHAH (Plaintiff) V/S NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Transfer of Property Act 1882
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 06-JUL-20
Approved for Reporting


603) 503/2009 Const. P. Niaz Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


604) 456/1988 Suit MUHAMMAD WAJID KHAN. (Plaintiff) V/S M/S. ATTOCK CEMENT FAC. PAK. LTD. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
A remedy available to a person under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, cannot operate as an absolute bar for seeking a remedy under an ordinary civil jurisdiction by filing a suit. Article 22 and 24 of the Limitation Act, 1908, where under an action to seek compensation for an injury should be instituted within one year, is not applicable in the instant case, for the reason that Plaintiff was made to run from pillar to post for redressal of his grievance but without any success. Plaintiff was lastly operated upon on 15.10.1987 and the suit was filed on 17.11.1987, hence the cause of action and so is the grievance is of continuous nature. Well entrenched principle that if a person has a right to claim compensation for a wrong done to him, he should also have a remedy, has been attracted in the instant case. The Defendants, who are Employer [Client], Contractor and sub-contractors, respectively, were jointly and severally held liable to pay damages for the negligent acts, which caused the Plaintiff serious injury and partial disability of permanent nature. Damages have been awarded by invoking the principle of composite negligence.
Topic: Tort Law, Civil Procedure Code CPC (Damages)
Tag Line:A remedy available to a person under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, cannot operate as an absolute bar for seeking a remedy under an ordinary civil jurisdiction by filing a suit.The Defendants, who are Employer [Client], Contractor and sub-contractors, respectively, were jointly and severally held liable to pay damages for the negligent acts, which caused the Plaintiff serious injury and partial disability of permanent nature. Damages have been awarded by invoking the principle of composite negligence.
Citation:2016 CLC 1063
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 11-MAR-16
Approved for Reporting


605) 850/2020 Suit Dewan Sugar Mills Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Selection for audit under section 25 of the Sales Tax Act and section 46 of the Federal Excise Act requires the giving of reasons.
Advocates:Abdul Sattar Pirzada(ADVO-13903-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Faheem Bhayo(ADVO-2534-SBC-HYD),Ameer Bakhsh Metlo(ADVO-13549-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Aqeel Qureshi(ADVO-7601-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 09-AUG-21
Approved for Reporting


606) 1159/2019 Const. P. Allah Dino (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 03-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


607) 416/2019 Const. P. Majid Hussain Khokhar (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:PCSIR
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 17-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.801-K/2021 Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Science & Technology, Islamabad & another v. Majid Hussain Khokhar,C.P.810-K/2021 Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Science & Technology, Islamabad & another v. Tariq Mateen Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending ,Pending


608) 2386/2011 Const. P. Karachi Property Investment (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and ros (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 28-JUL-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.578-K/2017 Govt. of Sindh thr. Secy: Culture Deptt: v. Karachi Property Investment Company (Pvt) Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


609) 2520/2014 Const. P. Syed Faisal Ali and ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Back benefits)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 751
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 10-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


610) 562/2016 Const. P. Muhammad Munawar & others (Petitioner) V/S Fed: of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


611) 831/2012 Suit MS. SHEHAR BANO ALI (Plaintiff) V/S SYED MEHDI RAZA ALI & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahmood A. Khan
Order Date: 20-JUL-16
Approved for Reporting


612) 1608/2020 Suit Seamax Marine Services (Plaintiff) V/S The Ministry of Maritime Affairs & others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Rule 48 of Public Procurement Rules, 2004.
Advocates:Munawar Ali Issani(ADVO-2125-SBC-KHI),M. Omair Nisar Khan(ADVO-10502-SBC-KHI),M/S. BADAR ALAM & COMPANY(FIRM-261-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 14-JUL-21
Approved for Reporting


613) 21/2020 Criminal Appeal Sanaullah & Another (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Tag Line:Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Life)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Omar Sial, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 04-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


614) 1702/2020 Const. P. Hameedullah (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Enquiries and Anti-corruption Establishment Sindh (`E&ACE`) for issuance of his retirement notification and releasing his salaries up to 21.7.2013, wherein he has served for 10 years--In the light of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the competent authority of respondents/Home Secretary, Government of Sindh is directed to issue his retirement notification within two weeks and release his pensionary benefits under the law within a month from the date of receipt of this order and submit compliance report through MIT-II of this court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


615) 63/2016 Spl.Anti.Ter.J.A. Hafeezullah alias Hafiz Khan (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio
Order Date: 04-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


616) 2188/2012 Const. P. Adam Sugar Mills (Petitioner) V/S Respondent (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Tender (tender process)
Tag Line:Petitioner on payment of outstanding dues in terms of the Award cannot be termed as a defaulter and hence cannot be ousted to participate in the subject tender process.
Citation:2012 CLD 1734, 2013 SBLR Sindh 806
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 02-JUL-12
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.236-K/2012 Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. v. Adam Sugar Mills Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed


617) 4980/2015 Const. P. Ameen Steel (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 01-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


618) 1826/2019 Const. P. Syed Muzaffar Ali Jaffro (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (transfer and posting)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 08-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


619) 210/2019 Const. P. Atam Mal (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 06-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


620) 594/2010 Cr.Misc. M/s. Pirbhulal Goklani and Azizullah Shaikh, Advocates for the Applicant. (Applicant) V/S Syed Meeral Shah, D.P.G for the State. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 16-MAY-11
Approved for Reporting


621) 230/1993 Const. P. Faiz Mohammad Palari (Petitioner) V/S Member (L.U.) B.O.R. & ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 19-SEP-11
Approved for Reporting


622) 6967/2017 Const. P. Talha Nasir and Ors (Petitioner) V/S P.M.D.C and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PLD Sindh 88
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 23-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


623) 33/2019 Judicial Companies Misc. MUHAMMAD YOUSUF AHMED & OTHERS (Applicant) V/S ARTISTIC DENIM MILLS LIMITED (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:The Petitioners hold 14.45% shares in respondent Company and are aggrieved by the notice as well as the proceedings of the impugned Meeting dated 19.10.2019 and the resolutions passed thereon, whereby, related party transactions were approved in respect of 2 Companies, which have certain common Directorship. It is their case that they hold more than 10% of the shareholding and are, therefore, qualified to institute present proceedings, under s.136 of the Companies Act, 2017 which according to them has seriously prejudiced their interests. According to them statement of material facts under Section 134(3) of the Act, annexed with the impugned notice of meeting, failed to include the minimum information required under Regulation-5 of the Company (Related Parties Transactions and Maintenance of Related Records) Regulations, 2018, whereas, the meeting was also conducted without following proper procedure and has deprived the Petitioners from exercising their rights. However, the Petitioners have failed to make out a case for indulgence; hence, this petition fails and is accordingly dismissed with pending applications.
Citation:2021 CLD 134
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 16-APR-20
Approved for Reporting


624) 1738/2008 Suit SYED HUSSAIN ALI (Plaintiff) V/S SYED AKHTAR ALI & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


625) 1507/2019 Cr.Bail FAHEEMUDDIN S/O ALEEMUDDIN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:In section 395 PPC, while the alternative to life imprisonment is rigorous punishment ???which shall not be less than four years nor more than ten years???, that alternative punishment still provides for a maximum of 10 years, keeping the offence within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Thus, at the stage of bail when the Court looks at the alternate punishment provided under section 395 PPC, that is for the purposes of considering whether the case is one of further inquiry within the ambit of sub-section (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C., and it is not to say that the case does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 27-NOV-19
Approved for Reporting


626) 977/2014 Suit Asim Jofa. (Plaintiff) V/S K.M.C. & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 MLD 207
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 01-JUN-20
Approved for Reporting


627) 30/2018 Cr.Acctt.A HAROON PUNJWANI S/O SULEMAN (Appellant) V/S THE STATE THROUGH CHAIRMAN NAB (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Omar Sial, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 17-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


628) 33/2007 Judicial Companies Misc. Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan. (Applicant) V/S Beema Pakistan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Winding up petition
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 21-JUN-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2486/2019 Beema Pakistan Company Ltd, Karachi v. The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, Islamabad Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


629) 924/2009 Const. P. Baber Qayyum Raja (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 06-NOV-09
Approved for Reporting


630) 5058/2021 Const. P. Muhammad Rashid Siddiqui (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Khawaja Shams ul Islam(ADVO-3953-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Taha Ali Khan(ADVO-16320-SBC-KHC),Waleed Rehan Khanzada(ADVO-14977-SBC-KHI),Ashfaq Rafiq Janjua(ADVO-4858-SBC-KHW),Advocate General Sindh(ADVO-GEN-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 15-NOV-21
Approved for Reporting


631) 5850/2018 Const. P. Zeeshan Usman (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
The case of the petitioners, in nutshell, is that they were appointed in Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd. (SSGC) as Executive in Information Technology and Medical Services Department in Grade-I respectively, on contract basis vide office letter dated 14.11.2012. They continued to serve them till 31.12.2017, but their services were not regularized---In the light of above facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petitions are disposed of in the terms whereby the competent authority of respondent-company is directed to consider the case of the petitioners without any discrimination for regularization of their service in accordance with law, and dicta laid down by the Honorable Supreme Court vide unreported order dated 12.03.2018 passed in Civil Petitions No.67-K and 68-K of 2018, as discussed in the preceding paragraph, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment--Disposed of.
Topic: Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)
Tag Line:The case of the petitioners, in nutshell, is that they were appointed in Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd. (SSGC) as Executive in Information Technology and Medical Services Department in Grade-I respectively, on contract basis vide office letter dated 14.11.2012. They continued to serve them till 31.12.2017, but their services were not regularized---In the light of above facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petitions are disposed of in the terms whereby the competent authority of respondent-company is directed to consider the case of the petitioners without any discrimination for regularization of their service in accordance with law, and dicta laid down by the Honorable Supreme Court vide unreported order dated 12.03.2018 passed in Civil Petitions No.67-K and 68-K of 2018, as discussed in the preceding paragraph, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment--Disposed of.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 07-APR-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1754/2020 Sui Southern Gas Company Limited thr. its attorney S.M. Hassan Meerza v. Zeeshan Usmani and others,C.A.936/2020 Sui Southern Gas Company Limited thr. its attorney S.M. Hassan Meerza v. Zeeshan Usmani and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted.to be fixed after 3 months.status quo be maintained.,Disposed Allowed


632) 64/2011 Const. P. Syed Akbar Ali Shah (Petitioner) V/S Mst Mehar-U-Nisa and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 29-JUL-19
Approved for Reporting


633) 613/2013 Const. P. Ghulam Muhammad (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 PLC CS 797
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 25-JAN-14
Approved for Reporting


634) 3779/2012 Const. P. Irfan Iqbal Puri (Petitioner) V/S The Chairman, NAB and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ghulam Sarwar Korai
Order Date: 06-MAR-14
Approved for Reporting


635) 52/2006 Const. P. Israrul Haq (Petitioner) V/S Nooruddin (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Abdullah Chandio(ADVO-1763-SBC-KHI),Qaiser Hassan Khan(),Altaf Hussain(ADVO-6690-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 27-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


636) 4387/2014 Const. P. Pakistan Tibbi Pharmaceuticals Manufacturers (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: DRAP ACT, Sindh Food Authority Act, 2016, CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973
Tag Line:The petitions arise under and in relation to the Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan Act, 2012 (???DRAP Act???). petitioners contend, the DRAP Act cannot, does not and should not apply to various products as manufactured, sold, used or imported by them, including Unani medicines, prescriptions and preparations, We start with the first set of questions, which relate to the constitutionality of the DRAP Act as enacted under Article 144. This Article originally had two clauses, of which the second was omitted by the 8th Amendment in 1985. two changes made by the 18th Amendment, one was necessitated by the omission of the Concurrent List, and need not detain us. The other, which will require some comment, was that originally Article 144 applied only if two or more Provincial Assemblies passed the necessary resolutions. The present Constitution of course had two Legislative Lists on its commencement. The competences listed in the Federal List were exclusive to the Federation, those on the Concurrent List were common, and those which were not enumerated were exclusive to the Provinces. VThat ability of course is one of the defining characteristics of federal legislative power, since in respect of matters that lie in the Federal domain by right Parliament can make laws for the whole of Pakistan or any part thereof. It would be unduly restrictive of the purpose and intent behind Article 144 if Parliament, while making the law for which it has been given power cannot include therein provisions that relate to matters in the Federal domain as of right. Secondly, a provincial law made subsequent to the law made by the Federation under Article 144 may override or impliedly repeal the latter. This follows directly from the express provision that the Provincial Assemblies may amend or repeal the law made by Parliament. The 1976 Act, in like manner, ???fractured??? and ???receded???. It became provincial legislation and hence territorially bound. It now so operates in this and all other Provinces. It must be kept in mind that this position has remained unaltered, and is unaffected by the enactment of the DRAP Act under Article 144. Whatever may be the relationship of, and interaction between, the two laws, the 1976 Act does not now transcend or cross provincial boundaries in the manner of the DRAP Act. It is therefore our conclusion that in the present case, the scope of the legislative competence entrusted to Parliament in terms of Article 144 is governed by the terms of the resolution passed by the Punjab Assembly. Within 30 days of announcement of judgment the Authority under the DRAP Act shall issue proper guidelines, Simultaneously with posting the guidelines on its website, the Authority shall issue notice to each petitioner in the petitions to which this para applies. Interim orders made in any petition to which this para applies shall continue but will lapse 30 days from the date on which the guidelines are posted as above or the date on which the determination is made, whichever is later. following petitions are dismissed: CP D-4387/2014 and CP D-1684/2017. e following petitions are disposed off in terms of para 50 herein above: CP Nos. D- 6532/2014, 2623/2016, 6262/2016, 6263/2016, 6264/2016, 6265/2016, 6310/2016, 6820/2016, 7134/2016, 7135/2016, 1135/2017, 1921/2017, 2329/2017, 424/2017, 4421/2017, 5237/2017 and 5892/2017.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Omar Sial, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar(Author)
Order Date: 26-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


637) 1779/2020 Const. P. Pakistan Re-Insurance Co. Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Reasons
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 16-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


638) 176/2017 Civil Revision Raja Khan (Applicant) V/S Shah Nawaz & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 25-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


639) 6/2019 Cr.Acctt.A Faisal (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi
Order Date: 19-JUL-19
Approved for Reporting


640) 4789/2020 Const. P. Khizar Hayat (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:whether the petitioner can challenge the show cause notice issued against him and his suspension order in a Constitution Petition?--We are clear in mind that pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, a final decision against the petitioner has yet to be taken by the respondent- Police Department and he has to overcome the clog of pendency of disciplinary proceedings against him, if not finalized earlier; the said proceedings shall be finalized within two months from the date of the decision of this Court.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 25-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


641) 1461/1998 Suit A. QUBUBUDDIN KHAN (Plaintiff) V/S CHEC MILLWALA DREDGING CO. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Arbitration Law (Arbitration Act,1940 Section 15)
Tag Line:if illegallity is separable from the main award, the same can be modified / corrected by invocking section 15 of the Arbiration Act, 1940.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 24-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


642) 71/2008 Suit.B SONERI BANK LTD (Plaintiff) V/S CLASSIC DENIM MILLS PVT LTD (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 24-SEP-11
Approved for Reporting


643) 1101/2014 Const. P. Roshan Ali Solangi (Petitioner) V/S Family Judge Shahdadkot and an others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Topic: Family matter
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 25-MAY-15
Approved for Reporting


644) 88/2017 I. A Mohammad Shahid Murtaza (Appellant) V/S Warid Telcom Pvt Ltd. & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 MLD 433
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 04-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


645) 1762/2018 Suit Mrs. Zarina Iqbal (Plaintiff) V/S Haji Jaffar & others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 09-JUL-19
Approved for Reporting


646) 2109/2008 Const. P. Muhammad Ramzan (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 11-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.63-K/2017 Muhammad Ramazan v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


647) 1126/2013 Cr.Bail ASIM RIZWAN S/O YOUNUS RIZWAN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 SBLR Sindh 785
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 10-SEP-14
Approved for Reporting


648) 83/2015 Suit Nawab Brothers Steel Mills Ltd., & another. . (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Customs Act 1969)
Tag Line:Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----Ss.18(3), 30, 79, 104 & 131---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss.42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2---Notification S.R.O. 18(I)/2015, dated 14-1-2015---Suit for declaration and injunction---Interim injunction, grant of---Rate of duty---Determination---Principle---Plaintiffs imported goods from foreign supplier under contract executed prior to issuance of Notification S.R.O. 18(I)/2015, dated 14-1-2015---Plea raised by plaintiffs was that authorities be restrained from applying/deducting regulatory duty in terms of notification S.R.O. 18(I)/2015, dated 14-1-2015---Validity---Manner and method of date of determination of rate of duty on goods imported into Pakistan were subject to Ss.79 & 104 of Customs Act, 1969, and date of determination of rate of duty on goods exported was subject to provisions of S.131 of Customs Act, 1969---Imposition and collection of regulatory duty on "import" and "export" was different and distinct and no analogy could be drawn for interpreting the provision of one section of the statute with the other section in the same statute by referring to case-law dealing with one particular levy---Provisions of notification S.R.O. 18(I)/2015, dated 14-1-2015, were applicable on shipments of plaintiffs in terms of S.30 of Customs Act, 1969, irrespective of the fact that plaintiffs had entered into contract for purchase of consignments with foreign suppliers and opened letter of credits prior to 14-1-2015---High Court declined to grant interim injunction against applicability of notification S.R.O. 18(I)/2015, dated 14-1-2015---Suit was dismissed in circumstances.
Citation:2015 PTD 1308
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 27-JAN-15
Approved for Reporting


649) 1885/2015 Const. P. M/s CIM Shipping Inc (Petitioner) V/S Tousif Ahmed and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Compensation)
Citation:2019 PLC Lab. 121
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 13-APR-18
Approved for Reporting


650) 63/2000 Civil Revision Sachedino Kalwar (Applicant) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: Order VII, Rule 11. (Section 161(B) of Land Revenue Act)
Tag Line:Applicant first chose to contest the matter before the Revenue authority by filing its objections and attending hearings, and then once the order was passed, filed a Suit challenging the same. When an order is an appealable order in terms of s.161 ibid, which has not been availed, then the very maintainability of the Suit under section 9 CPC is big question mark; and impliedly bars jurisdiction of the Civil Court in such matters where the jurisdiction to adjudicate exclusively vested with the revenue Courts. . Admittedly, the Applicant failed to avail the statutory remedied of appeal and revision before the Commissioner and the Board of Revenue respectively against the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 05-NOV-21
Approved for Reporting


651) 3/2018 Judicial Companies Misc. Dr. Muhammad Imran Qureshi & Others (Applicant) V/S Mohammad Asif & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Forensic Audit of Company / Respondent No. 5 ordered in terms of Section 286 of the Companies Act ordered.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 18-NOV-19
Approved for Reporting


652) 1764/2014 Suit Muhammad Hussain & Others (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Faced with the presumptive taxation of imports, supplies, contract, exports etc. under section 80-C and 80-CC of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, where tax payers challenged the constitutionality of presumptive taxation, the Supreme Court of Pakistan in its landmark judgment of Ellahi Cotton Mills (Supra) held that section 80C and 80CC (Section 148 and 153 and 154 in Ordinance 2001) provides for presumptive taxation of income within the category of presumptive tax as under the same the persons covered by them pay a pre-determined amount of presumptive tax in full and final discharge of their tax liability in respect of the transactions on which above tax is levied. If Entry 47 is read in isolation without reference to Entry No.52 one can urge that Entry 47 does not admit the imposition of presumptive tax as the expression ???tax on income??? employed therein should be understood as to the working out of the same on the basis of computation as provided in the various provisions of Ordinance. Thus, it can be held that presumptive tax is in fact akin to capacity tax i.e. capacity to earn.
Citation:2016 PTD 622, 2016 SBLR Sindh 1484
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 08-SEP-15
Approved for Reporting


653) 3673/2021 Const. P. Arshad Ali Khan (Petitioner) V/S FBR and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Maintainability of Petition against a Show Cause Notice; held not maintainable.
Advocates:Ali Wahid(ADVO-16298-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Rashida Asad(Author)
Order Date: 23-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


654) 2337/2007 Const. P. Zahid Saeed (Petitioner) V/S CDGK & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 10-JAN-10
Approved for Reporting


655) 34/2012 Cr.Rev Muhammad Sharif (Applicant) V/S Sageer Ahmed and Another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 08-MAR-13
Approved for Reporting


656) 1673/2009 Const. P. Abuzer Ghaffari Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan through the Secretary Ministry of Defence and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 MLD 1806
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 15-JAN-18
Approved for Reporting


657) 305/2010 Const. P. Syed Ayaz Haider (Petitioner) V/S M/s. Noble House (Pvt) Ltd & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 15-APR-13
Approved for Reporting


658) 1585/2013 Cr.Bail MUHAMMAD QAISER S/O MUHAMMAD SHARIF (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 25-MAR-14
Approved for Reporting


659) 1499/2017 Suit Faisal Mehmood (Plaintiff) V/S PIA Corporation Limited & another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 08-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


660) 2288/2016 Const. P. Ms. Azra Muqeem (Petitioner) V/S KMC & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Promotion)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) Note 2
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 23-JAN-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.322-K/2018 Khursheed Mukaram v. Ms. Azra Muqeem and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


661) 3463/2010 Suit Dr Raheela Magsi (Petitioner) V/S Prov of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 18-MAY-12
Approved for Reporting


662) 187/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Mushtaque & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 13-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


663) 1492/2011 Suit MAHMOODA TAPAL & ANOTHERS (Plaintiff) V/S STANDARD CHARTERED BANK (PAKISTAN) LTD & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 PLD Sindh Note 28
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 06-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


664) 77/2010 Cr.Appeal Asif Ali Jagirani (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Rasool Memon
Order Date: 29-JUN-12
Approved for Reporting


665) 12/2013 J.M Karachi Development Company (Applicant) V/S IM Technologies Pakistan & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 CLC Note 157
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 15-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting


666) 1/2017 M.A. Show Time Cable & Datacom Pvt Limited (Appellant) V/S PEMRA & Another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Television Broadcast Station Operations) Regulations, 2012, Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Rules, 2009 (Rule 5), PEMRA Ordinance, 2002 (section 13), PEMRA Ordinance, 2002
Tag Line:Two propositions/counts are as under: (i) That for the impugned decision an opinion was sought from the Regional Council of Complaints which had no jurisdiction under the ibid Ordinance to comment and/or recommend any opinion ,as far as dispute is concerned; (ii) That even if such recommendations are ignored to have been forwarded by the Council of Complaints and the impugned order be seen as an independent decision of PEMRA then again, the details of the outstanding dues does not seems to generate from PEMRA Ordinance 2002, Regulations 2011-12 and PEMRA Rules 2009, and hence are/were illegal and unlawful, and could be struck down by this Court on merit. -So far as the first question as raised by the appellant is concerned, is answered in affirmative that the Council of Complaints had no jurisdiction for rendering opinion/recommendation to PEMRA ???under the Ordinance??? and its role in this regard and the advice sought is of no avail and merits no consideration; it should have been an independent order of PEMRA in view of provisions of PEMRA Ordinance. - Schedule-B attached to these rules enables PEMRA to recover in-house channel fee for cable TV. Table VI provides licence fee of Rs.175,000/-upto10,000 subscribers as B-5 category which category appellant is enjoying followed by annual renewal of Rs.87,500/-. This amount is being paid by the appellant in terms of said rules as reflected in the outstanding dues chart hereinabove. It also enable the licensor PEMRA to recover Rs.24/-per subscriber per year which is a subscriber fee(Table VI), disclosed in horizontal column 2 in the subject chart incorporated in the impugned order. Table IX deals with in-house channel licence fee and is chargeable to all categories from B-1 to B-10. -Thus, in view of aforesaid rules and regulations, the claim is legitimate and I do not see any transgression of the PEMRA authority in claiming the amount mentioned in the impugned decision. -.It is pertinent to point out that rationale and vires of such levy and charge were argued by appellant???s counsel as the fee and other claims are claimed to be disproportionate. Perhaps these arguments could have served better had it been a case of challenging the vires of regulations and rules.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 28-APR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3385/2021 Show Time Cable & Datacom (Pvt) Limited, Karachi v. Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority, Islamabad through Chairman and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


667) 150/2015 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Collector of Customs (Applicant) V/S The Customs Appellate Tribunal Bench-III & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Customs:- Amnesty Scheme once granted; no further demand of 1% flood Relief Surcharge can be raised.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 01-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


668) 2535/2010 Const. P. National Gases Limited (Petitioner) V/S Ministry of Railways & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 PTD 2552
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 12-DEC-14
Approved for Reporting


669) 31/2012 Const. P. Mst. Rehana Hafeez (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Ali alias Ehsan (through legal heirs) (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 22-JUL-13
Approved for Reporting


670) 5220/2017 Const. P. Sami Pharmaceuticals (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Province Of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 17-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


671) 8592/2018 Const. P. Al-Noor Sugar Mills Ltd and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 CLC 232
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 05-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


672) 6244/2019 Const. P. Azizullah (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Whether the Petitioner is qualified for the post of Head Master/Head Mistress in BPS-17 in Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh? ii) Whether the post of Head Master/Head Mistress in BPS-17 in Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh is to be filled by 80% by initial appointment through Sindh Public Service Commission (except contract employees) and 20% by promotion amongst the various categories of teachers having 7 years??? service in BPS-16?
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


673) 144/2014 Civil Revision Mst. Parveen Raza Jadun through her legal heirs (Applicant) V/S Bashir Ahmed Chandio and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
(i). In direct benami claim requires a higher standard of proof; (ii) every transaction between family members cannot be recognized as benami; (iii). Claimant not challenged the purchase of property by father in favour of his son, during the life time of the father, then claim of Plaintiff (sister) is meritless.
Tag Line:(i). In direct benami claim requires a higher standard of proof; (ii) every transaction between family members cannot be recognized as benami; (iii). Claimant not challenged the purchase of property by father in favour of his son, during the life time of the father, then claim of Plaintiff (sister) is meritless.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 12-JUL-19
Approved for Reporting


674) 2072/2014 Const. P. General (Retd.) Pervez Musharraf (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 PLD Sindh 389
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahnawaz Tariq, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 12-JUN-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.870/2014,C.M.A.2411/2016,C.P.2488/2014,C.M.A.2412/2016,C.P.1050/2014,C.P.1030/2014 SCP Status:Disposed Dismissed,Pending ,Disposed Dismissed for Non-Prosecution,Pending ,Disposed Dismissed for Non-Prosecution,Disposed Leave Granted. Interim Relief also Granted.


675) 215/2015 Suit Muhammad Rafiq (Plaintiff) V/S Habib Bank Limited. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Faraz Faheem Siddiqui(ADVO-12257-SBC-KHI),Mohammad Jamshid Malik(ADVO-16711-SBC-KHS),In Person(INP)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 14-JUL-21
Approved for Reporting


676) 288/2019 Criminal Appeal MUHAMMAD SALEEM SHAHZAD S/O PARO (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 04-JUL-20
Approved for Reporting


677) 2719/2011 Const. P. Dilip Kumar & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Prov of Sindh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 18-JUL-12
Approved for Reporting


678) 49/2012 Civil Revision Mumtaz Ali Hulio (Applicant) V/S Azhar Ali and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Topic: Pre-emption
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 25-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


679) 73/2007 H.C.A Tariq Qureshi & Ors (Appellant) V/S Mrs. Afroz Shah & Or (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 14-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.353-K/2019 Muhammad Faisal and another v. Mrs. Mumtaz Muzakkir and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


680) 1971/2011 Const. P. Khursheed Ali Junejo (Petitioner) V/S Sindh Province Through Chief Secretary and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Farooq Ali Channa, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 12-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


681) 555/2019 Criminal Appeal MUSHTAQUE AHMED S/O MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 14-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


682) 1377/2014 Const. P. Akmal Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Secretary Establishment Government of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 SBLR Sindh 128
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi
Order Date: 23-AUG-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.14-K/2018 Akmal Hussain v. The Secy: Estabishment Div. Govt. of Pakistan, Islambad and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


683) 2692/2020 Const. P. Shahnawaz and Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Seniority matter--SRP--Police Constables--Adverting to the point raised by learned counsel for the petitioners that they were appointed in SRP Karachi and posted in RRF Karachi since 2009, thus their seniority is liable to be maintained in Karachi range, suffice it to say that prima-facie, the RRF was / is not part of the Karachi range, but is a combination of different regions/units of the Sindh police, merely their appointment in SRP Karachi and posting in RRF Karachi does not support their case to the effect that they belonged to Karachi Range Police, for the reason that they never remained posted in the Karachi range police, therefore, their seniority cannot be ordered to be mixed with Karachi range police. The record further reflects that their recommendations for initial appointments by their regional head were made based on their respective place of domicile. Petitioners have failed to point out that their appointment was / is based on Karachi domicile, therefore they are precluded to claim vested right for seniority and promotion at Karachi Range on the aforesaid analogy--Dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 25-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1438-K/2020 Shah Nawaz & others v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary Government of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


684) 640/2008 Suit PSO LTD (Plaintiff) V/S CANTONMENT BAORD CLIFTON & OTHER (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Cantonments Act 1924, Civil Procedure Code CPC (Declaration and Permanent Injunction)
Citation:2019 CLC 1253
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 26-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


685) 4201/2020 Const. P. Shamsuddin Dal (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:The pivotal question involved in the present proceedings is whether a Civil / Government Servant who is found guilty of misconduct under The Sindh Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973, and a minor penalty was imposed upon him could be considered for promotion? ---In our view, the promotion to a post depends upon several circumstances. To qualify for the promotion, the least that is expected of an employee is to have an unblemished record. An employee found guilty of misconduct cannot be placed at par with the other employees, and his case has to be treated differently. While considering an employee for promotion his entire service record has to be taken into consideration and if a promotion committee takes the penalties imposed upon the employee into consideration and denies him the promotion, such denial cannot be termed as arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal or unjustified. In our view, the evaluation made by an Expert Committee should not be easily interfered with by this Court which does not have the necessary expertise to undertake the exercise that is necessary for such purpose. It is a settled proposition that the DPC, within its power to make its assessment, has to assess every proposal for promotion, on case to case basis. In cases where disciplinary case / criminal prosecution against the Civil / Government servant is not concluded even after the expiry of two years from the date of the meeting of the first DPC which kept its findings in respect of the Government servant the appointing authority may consider the desirability of giving him an ad-hoc promotion--Dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 03-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.405-K/2021 Shamsuddin Dal v. Province of Sindh & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


686) 1272/2020 Const. P. Mst. Salma @ Ume-Salma (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh, through Secretary Home Department Sindh Secretariat, Karachi & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 05-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


687) 263/2021 Criminal Miscelleneous ABDUL GHAFFAR S/O MUHAMMAD SHARIF (Applicant) V/S THE STATE & ANOTHER (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010 (The court cannot interfere during investigation.)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 30-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


688) 100/2009 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. M/s.P & G International Lahore (Appellant) V/S Assistant Collector of Customs & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 14-JAN-10
Approved for Reporting


689) 154/2021 Const. P. TARIQ MASOOD (Petitioner) V/S SHER MUHAMMAD DIN & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979
Tag Line: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)
Order Date: 09-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


690) 279/2015 Const. P. Kamran Bhutto (Petitioner) V/S Mst Farsa Manzoor & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2018 CLC 84
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 20-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


691) 1208/2011 Const. P. M/s.International Business Management (Petitioner) V/S Aziz Ahmed (Late) & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah
Order Date: 04-DEC-13
Approved for Reporting


692) 568/2009 Cr.Bail Anwar Ali (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahid Anwar Bajwa
Order Date: 09-AUG-11
Approved for Reporting


693) 1544/2013 Suit Kamran Ali Khan and another (Plaintiff) V/S Vaneeza Umeran and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 19-SEP-16
Approved for Reporting


694) 1547/2016 Const. P. Aamir Jamil (Petitioner) V/S University of Karachi and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (statutory or non statutory rules of service)
Citation:2018 SBLR Sindh 524
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 20-SEP-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.663-K/2017 Aamir Jamil v. University of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


695) 169/2020 Const. P. Fajjar Din (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:This Constitutional Petition has been filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari/ mandamus to call for the records relating to the Compulsory Retirement Order dated 01.11.2012 and Appellate Order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the respondent-Airport Security Force (hereinafter referred to as `ASF'), and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to reinstate services of the petitioner as an Inspector (ASF).
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 01-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.760-K/2021 Mr. Fajjar Din v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


696) 4047/2015 Const. P. Muhammad Ali Javed and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:The general principles of up-gradation that to our mind emerge from the enunciations of the Supreme Court can be elucidated as follows: (i) ???Up-gradation??? is not the same as ???promotion???, the latter being a term specifically defined in civil service statutes; (ii) Up-gradation is essentially an upgrade of the post to a higher ???pay-scale??? and not a promotion to a higher ???grade???. Thus, the incumbent of the upgraded post retains his substantive grade; (iii) Up-gradation is meant for isolated posts, where the service structure does not provide avenues for promotion to a higher pay-scale thus putting the incumbent at a disadvantage as compared to other employees, its purpose being to address the stagnation and frustration of the employee of such post so that he/she remains productive; (iv) To justify up-gradation, the Government will have to demonstrate that it is required for restructuring or reforming the department or to meet exigencies of service in the public interest. In other words, up-gradation should be pursuant to a scheme or a policy; (v) Up-gradation should not be to the prejudice of other employees and should not be used to by-pass prescribed rules of promotion. Rel. Ali Azhar Khan Baloch v. Province of Sindh (2015 SCMR 456); Regional Commissioner Income Tax v. Munawar Ali (2017 PLC (C.S.) 1030); and Federal Public Service Commission v. Anwar-ul-Haq (2017 SCMR 890).
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 22-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


697) 31/2016 F.R.A Dr.Muhammad Hassan (Appellant) V/S Additional Controller of Rents & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:(a) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----S.3---Rent Controller---Jurisdiction---Government building---Neither any other Court nor parties can confer jurisdiction on a Court / Tribunal when it is expressly barred by Cantonment Rent Restriction Act, 1963. (b) Jurisdiction--- ----Question of---Principle---Whenever question of jurisdiction of a Court is raised by any party it has to be decided first by the Court as preliminary issue. A.M Qureshi v. Government of Sindh and others 1991 SCMR 1103 rel. (c) Jurisdiction--- ----Interim order, passing of--- Principle--- Court having no jurisdiction to adjudicate on dispute between parties on merit, cannot even pass interim order and then penalize parties for its non-compliance. (d) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----Ss.3, 17, 19(8) & 24--- Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 10-A & 23---Eviction of tenant---Property rights---Rent Controller, jurisdiction of---Petitioners were having lease agreements in their favour executed by Federal Government and the Government sought their eviction from Rent Controller on the plea of raising commercial buildings---Validity---Tenants had perpetual right in demised shops under the agreements with Federal Government and whenever the government decided to launch any commercial project by demolishing the property in question, the rights of tenants under existing agreement were to be protected and no effort should be made to wriggle out of the contractual obligations except in accordance with law---Tenants were to be properly informed with relevant material details of any proposed action---Landlord had filed cases in the Court of Additional Rent Controller despite the fact that he had no jurisdiction and then tried to subvert entire trial in the name of S. 19(8) of Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963 which was a mala fide attempt to deprive tenants from their Constitutionally guaranteed lawful right in demised shops---High Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction set aside eviction orders passed by Rent Controller---Appeal was allowed in circumstances. Suo moto Case No.04 of 2010 PLD 2012 SC 553; Inaam-ul-Haq v. Muhammad Ali Shaheen and another 2013 CLC 904; Sh. Riaz-ul-Haq and another v. Federation of Pakistan through Minisry of Law and others PLD 2013 SC 501; Zulfiqar Ahmed khan v. Station Commander, Station Headquarters, Karachi and another 2010 CLC 354 and Ghulam Mustafa Bughio v. Additional Controller of Rents, Clifton and others" 2006 SCMR 145 ref. M.H Mussadaq v. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal 2004 SCMR 1453; Khawaja Muhammad Mughees v. Mrs. Sughra Dadi 2001 SCMR 2020; Asif Najma Ansaizi v. Mrs. Mariam Mirza and another 2014 MLD 1304; Arif Lakhani v. Irfan Nazar and another 2014 CLC 1756; Uzma Construction Co. v. Navid H. Malik 2015 SCMR 642; Muhammad Saqib v. S.M Mushtaq 2015 YLR 723; Mian Muhammad Lateef v. Mst. Nasima Warsi through L.R 2009 CLC 279; Najma Aziz Sethi v. Muhammad Azeem Butt 2008 MLD 42; Dawood Khan through Attorney v. Sheraz Ahmed 2009 YLR 1238; Zulfiqar Ahmed Khan v. Station Commander, Station Headquarters, Karachi an another 2010 CLC 354; M.K. Muhammad and another v. Muhammad Abu Bakar 1993 SCMR 200; Mrs. Ghazala Iftikhar v. Controller/Additional Controller of Rents and another 2012 YLR 74 and Abdul Latif and another v. Messrs Parmacie Plus 2019 SCMR 627 distinguished.
Citation:2020 CLC 1720
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 06-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


698) 1010/2020 Cr.Bail HASSAN RABBANI S/O TARIQ RABBANI (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author)
Order Date: 22-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


699) 8/2016 M.A. M/s. EFU General Insurance Ltd. (Appellant) V/S Jahangir Moghul (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, Civil Procedure Code CPC
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 09-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.445-K/2021 M/s. EFU General Insurace Ltd. v. Jahangir Moghul Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


700) 1569/2000 Suit Ali Muhammad & another (Plaintiff) V/S Faizullah & another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 16-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


701) 1412/2021 Const. P. Ameet Kumar (Petitioner) V/S The Chief Secretary Government of Sindh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:joining, seniority and qualification
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


702) 108/2014 Cr.J.A Riaz Khan and others (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ghulam Qadir Leghari, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 27-APR-16
Approved for Reporting


703) 201/2019 Cr.Rev MST. NAGHMA IMJRAN WD/O IMRAN KHAN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:The Explanation clause of section 435 Cr.P.C. entails that while the High Court can call for and examine the record of proceeding before a Magistrate, either suo moto or in Revision arising from an order of a Sessions Judge, a Revision ???application??? against the order of a Magistrate is to filed by the litigant to the Sessions Judge to whom the Magistrate is a Court ???inferior??? within the meaning of the Explanation clause of section 435 Cr.P.C.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 06-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


704) 1913/2017 Const. P. Gulzar Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Topic: Environment Law (Cutting of Trees), Sindh Local Government Act
Tag Line:Cutting of Trees (Environment): Green Belt with trees is a 'Public Trust' resource. Environmental Human Rights are in fact fundamental human rights. Plea of National Security is also justiciable. "Rational Basis Test" explained. Balance is to be struck between the policies relating to security and civil liberties. State Institutions are subject to the accountability. Judiciary in a Muslim Polity is clothed with greater obligation. Only concern council can direct the cutting of dangerous trees under paragraph 55 of Part II-Schedule II of SLGA 2013.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


705) 151/2016 Cr.Rev Muhammad Javed (Applicant) V/S VIIIth Addl Session Judge Hyd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2018 PCr.LJ 1522
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 14-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


706) 1041/2021 Const. P. Abdul Sattar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:regularization
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


707) 1083/2020 Const. P. Syed Jawad Arshad (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Quashing / bail, in fiscal offences, in writ jurisdiction
Advocates:Deputy Attorney General(),Muhammad Bilal(ADVO-716-SBC-NSF),Ghulam Asghar Pathan(ADVO-13987-SBC-KHI),Aqeel Ahmed Khan(ADVO-12466-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 03-SEP-21
Approved for Reporting


708) 8620/2017 Const. P. M/s Pakistan International Container Terminal Ltd (Petitioner) V/S SLAT and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 22-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


709) 4849/2016 Const. P. Rafique Ahmed Memon (Petitioner) V/S The NAB (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan
Order Date: 28-APR-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.2129/2017 Rafique Ahmed v. The NAB thr. its Chairman, Islamabad,C.P.4706/2017 Rafique Ahmed v. The NAB thr. its Chairman, Islamabad Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed ,Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed


710) 4864/2020 Const. P. Hasan Khursheed Hashmi (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito(Author)
Order Date: 04-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3927/2021 Mst. Hira Imam and others v. Hasan Khurshid Hashmi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned


711) 1899/2009 Const. P. Haji Muhammad Iqbal and others (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Saeed and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 09-MAR-11
Approved for Reporting


712) 4666/2013 Const. P. Afaq A. Qureshi (Petitioner) V/S Chief Secretary and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 29-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


713) 5956/2018 Const. P. Seemah Irfan (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Tax matter
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4114/2019 Dr. Seema Irfan & others v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Secretary Revenue M/o Finance Ex-Officio Chairman FBR, Islamabad & others,C.A.113/2020 Dr. Seema Irfan & others v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Secretary Revenue M/o Finance Ex-Officio Chairman FBR, Islamabad & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted/Status quo,Pending


714) 75/2010 H.C.A M/s.Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan (Appellant) V/S Nisar Ahmed Akhoond (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 17-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.208-K/2017 M/s Industrial Development Bank Ltd. v. Nisar Ahmed Akhoond Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed with Cost


715) 31/2017 Cr.Misc. MEHMOOD RANGOONWALA & 02 ORS (Applicant) V/S FURQAN ALI MUSTAFA & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 03-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


716) 5907/2020 Const. P. Overseas Pakistanis Foundation (Petitioner) V/S NIRC and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.228/2021 Overseas Pakistanis Foundation thr. its authorized Office, Karachi v. National Industrial Relations Commission(Full Bench) , Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


717) 3/2019 Criminal Appeal Dost Muhammad Thebo & Another (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Tag Line:Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Life)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Omar Sial, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 04-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


718) 20/2007 II.A. Mst. Rukhsana Tabassum Shaikh (Appellant) V/S Kazim Imam Jan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 08-NOV-16
Approved for Reporting


719) 136/2010 Civil Revision Jan Muhammad and others (Applicant) V/S Ghulam Nabi and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 06-DEC-13
Approved for Reporting


720) 180/2019 Cr.Bail Waheed Dehpal Chandio (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 24-JUN-19
Approved for Reporting


721) 1084/2015 Suit Engro Elengy Terminal (Pvt) Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 26-MAY-16
Approved for Reporting


722) 2217/2019 Const. P. Dilbar Khan Nizamani (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Chairman UC Nazim case
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


723) 77/2013 II.A. ABDUL RASHID (Appellant) V/S MAQBOOL AHMED (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author)
Order Date: 14-JUN-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.65-K/2018 Abdul Rasheed v. Maqbool Ahmed Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed for Non-Prosecution


724) 156/2016 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Collector of Customs (Applicant) V/S M/s. S. Najmuddin Ahmed & Co. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 03-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


725) 1909/2008 Const. P. Dr. Rubina Mangi (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 25-FEB-10
Approved for Reporting


726) 233/2015 H.C.A Zahid Younus (Appellant) V/S Party-2 (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan
Order Date: 05-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


727) 641/2020 Suit Mr. Shakeel Qadir (Plaintiff) V/S Mst. Shumaila Umair (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 26-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


728) 6046/2017 Const. P. Ghulam Mustafa Daudpota (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
The disciplinary matters fall within the expression ???terms and conditions of service??? which in this case are non-statutory rules of service. Hence, the same cannot be called into question within the ambit of constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. Our view is supported by the latest decision rendered by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Maj. (R) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas and other connected Appeals , 2019 SCMR 984.
Tag Line: The disciplinary matters fall within the expression ???terms and conditions of service??? which in this case are non-statutory rules of service. Hence, the same cannot be called into question within the ambit of constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. Our view is supported by the latest decision rendered by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Maj. (R) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas and other connected Appeals , 2019 SCMR 984.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 14-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3452/2020 Ghulam Murtaza Daudpoto v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Sindh, Karachi and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


729) 122/2014 Civil Revision Mst Yasmeen (Applicant) V/S Mst Saeeda Begum and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 28-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


730) 1498/2011 Const. P. Ali Akbar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


731) 2231/2014 Const. P. Muhammad Dawood Wagan (Petitioner) V/S The province of Sindh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Amenity Plot (Allowed), Amenity Plot (Conversion of amenity plot into Residential / commercial)
Tag Line:In the light of foregoing, we have reached the conclusion that the amenity plots cannot be converted into either commercial or residential purposes and no encroachment can be allowed on the amenity plot as discussed supra. The report of learned Commissioner is very clear in its terms that no any amenity plot was found in existence in the housing scheme during the inspection, except one open plot of about 1200 sq.ft and a mosque about 2400 sq. ft. in Kehkashan Housing Scheme and Midland Bungalow adjacent with plot No.38 and 39, therefore, the objections raised by the learned counsel for the Respondents 8 & 9 on the site inspection report are of no consequence in view of the orders passed by this Court and Hon???ble Supreme Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


732) 235/2010 Cr.J.A Muhammad Iqbal Makrani (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 23-APR-13
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.A.315/2013 Muhammad Iqbal v. The State,J.P.220/2013 Muhammad Iqbal v. The State Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed ,Disposed Leave Granted


733) 646/2021 Const. P. M/s Al-Kousar Drinking Water (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:to direct the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KW&SB) to grant him license to continue his business for supplying Brackish water via Pipe Line from Subsoil/boring to National Refinery and other industries in Karachi--we are not inclined to subscribe to the request of the petitioner because no right of the petitioner to extract minerals/brackish water has been established and prima-facie under the garb of this petition he has attempted to continue such an activity illegally
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 28-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


734) 239/2016 H.C.A Allah Dino Khaskheli (Appellant) V/S Zakir Mehmood & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: H.C.A (reinstatement in service)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 999
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 10-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.14-K/2019 Allah Dino Khaskheli v. Zakir Mehmood and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


735) 22/2018 I. A Mashooq Ali Rajpar (Appellant) V/S Raja Abdul Hameed & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 04-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1277-K/2020 Mashooq Ali Rajpar v. Raja Abdul Hameed Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


736) 219/2019 Criminal Appeal ANANTKUMAR PARSHOTAM (Appellant) V/S MEM. OF MANAGING COMT. NARAYAN TEMPLE TRUST & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:1. Under section 8-A of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, an order that is appealable to the High Court does not include an order dismissing the complaint. However, the appeal can be converted to a criminal revision. 2. In order to constitute an offence under the Illegal Dispossession Act, the complaint must disclose actus reas and mens rea, and if the facts that constitute an offence under section 3 of the Illegal Dispossession Act are not disclosed through the complaint or documents with it, then the Court can dismiss the complaint straight away. Rel: Waqar Ali v. The State (PLD 2011 SC 181).
Citation:2021 PCr.LJ Note 38
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 17-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


737) 491/2011 Cr.Appeal Abdul Ghaffar (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar
Order Date: 31-MAR-16
Approved for Reporting


738) 5326/2016 Const. P. Nazeer Ahmed Abro (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 16-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting


739) 1778/2014 Suit Muhammad Iqbal. (Plaintiff) V/S Zafar Hussain & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC
Advocates:S. Shamim Ahmed Riazi(ADVO-2732-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 24-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting


740) 4479/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Imran Khan Chishti (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Appointment)
Citation:2018 PLC (CS) Note 129
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 21-AUG-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.536-K/2017 Muhammad Imran Khan Chishti v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


741) 40/2001 Civil Revision Shamsuddin and others (Applicant) V/S Abdul Jabbar & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Tag Line:Islamic law--- ----Pre-emption suit--- Talbs, performance of--- Requirements---Plaintiffs had failed to produce two witnesses of the occasion/event when they came to know that defendants had sold or they were about to sell their property and plaintiffs raised their right of pre-emption against the defendants---Plaintiffs were required to produce two witnesses of Talb-i-Ishhad but they had not produced the second witness nor had mentioned second witness in their claim of pre-emption---Plaintiffs had failed to prove their right of pre-emption, in circumstances---Revision was dismissed accordingly. [Paras. 7, 8, 9 & 10 of the judgment]
Citation:2020 CLC Note 25
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 03-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


742) 7077/2015 Const. P. Amanullah and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Promotion (Constitution of Committee)
Citation:2021 SBLR Sindh Note 309
Advocates:Hussain Bux(ADVO-13264-SBC-KHE),Assitant Adv.Gen. Sindh(AssAdvGen),Mukesh Kumar G. Karara(ADVO-836-SBC-SUK)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 26-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


743) 240/1971 Suit AMIR ALI (Plaintiff) V/S GUL SHAKER & ORS. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Administration Suits (Property left by Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Fatima Jinnah and Shireen Jinnah)
Tag Line:Report has been furnished by the Nazir today which shows that a total sum of Rs. 73,32,51,903/- is available with the Nazir. A proposal is made that these sums be used as seed funds by the new Trust for building Girls Medical College/Hospital at the said premises. Learned AAG states that the Government of Sindh would like to participate in such a noble initiative and he has no objection if the property be used solely for the purpose of construction of building and operation of Medical College/Hospital exclusively for girls with residential facilities therein, with regard to the sums deposited by the Provincial Government, learned AAG seeks time to get a nod from the concerned authority as if this fund could be used as token of good gesture or whether Sindh Government wishes these sums to be returned.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 13-OCT-21
Approved for Reporting


744) 38/2012 Spl.Cr.A.T.A. Ali AKbar & 2 Others (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar
Order Date: 16-MAY-16
Approved for Reporting


745) 88/2014 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Collector of Customs (Applicant) V/S M/s. Eastern Construction Co., Khi (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 22-DEC-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.159-K/2015 Collector of Customs v. M/s Eastern Construction Company Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


746) 1176/1997 Suit S.M. YOUSUF (Plaintiff) V/S THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Shahenshah Hussain(ADVO-315-SBC-KHI),S. Irtaza Hussain Zaidi(ADVO-2043-SBC-KHI),S. Faiq Hussain Rizvi(ADVO-2514-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 23-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


747) 1431/2011 Const. P. Shakeel Ahmed Buriro (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Kausar Parveen and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi
Order Date: 20-SEP-13
Approved for Reporting


748) 540/2005 Suit MANSOOR AHMED & ORS (Plaintiff) V/S MST. SAEEDA BEGUM & ORS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:1965 PLD Sindh 3746, 1983 PLD SC 693, 1985 PLD Sindh 274, 2008 PLD SC 42, 1995 SCMR 1431, 2004 SCMR Sindh 834, 1990 CLC 1649, 2001 CLC 1686, 2007 CLC 1814, 2005 YLR 1905, 2007 YLR 2333, 2016 YLR 2528, 1999 MLD 3345
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 10-JAN-19
Approved for Reporting


749) 772/2002 Const. P. Ayazuddin & ano (Petitioner) V/S Vth ADJ (East) Karachi & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author)
Order Date: 26-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.53-K/2019 Asif Siddiui v. Ayazuddin and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


750) 8518/2017 Const. P. Munner Ahmed and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 08-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3793/2018 Muneer Ahmed & another v. The Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secretary, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed


751) 3189/2019 Const. P. Captain (R) Javed Afzal & Ors (Petitioner) V/S P.I.A.C.L & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Pension matters)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 09-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.442-K/2019 Capt: (Retd) Javed Afzal and others v. Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) Corporation Ltd.,C.A.22-K/2020 Capt: (Retd) Javed Afzal and others v. Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) Corporation Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Pending


752) 754/2016 Cr.Bail SHERAZ S/O ALI BHAI (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Humayon Khan
Order Date: 02-AUG-16
Approved for Reporting


753) 45/2014 S.M.A Mst. Mehrunnissa (Petitioner) V/S N.A (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Ashraf Jehan
Order Date: 19-JAN-15
Approved for Reporting


754) 4151/2020 Const. P. M/s Popular Juice Ind Pv Ltd and Othes (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 23-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.124-K/2021 Federation of Pakistan thorugh Chairman Federal Board of Revenue & others v. M/s. Popular Juice Industries & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned for an early date. CP 100,124-K are delinked


755) 104/2019 Criminal Miscelleneous SHOUKAT ALI KHATIAN & OTHERS (Applicant) V/S THE IST ADJ, KARACHI SOUTH & ANOTHER (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Criminal Procedure Code
Tag Line:Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 22-A, 22-B & 154---Order of ex-officio Justice of Peace to register FIR---Scope---Application under S.22-A, Cr.P.C. was allowed by the Justice of Peace and SHO was directed to register the case in accordance with law---Validity---Station House Officer had no authority to refuse to record the statement of complainant in the relevant register irrespective of its authenticity/ correctness or falsity of such statement---High Court was not supposed to comment on the possible outcome of the inquiry and investigation which was to be conducted by SHO after recording statement of respondent---Whatever was the stance of the applicants, it should first be brought to the notice of SHO to falsify the statement of respondent, if any, incorporated in the FIR---If the statement of respondent after inquiry and investigation found to be false, the SHO could prosecute respondent under S. 182, P.P.C.---Criminal miscellaneous application was dismissed accordingly. Brig. (Retd.) Imtiaz Ahmad v. Government of Pakistan through Secretary, Interior Division, Islamabad and 2 others 1994 SCMR 2142 ref. Muhammad Bashir v. Station House Officer, Okara Cantt. and others PLD 2007 SC 539 and Younas Abbas and others v. Additional Sessions Judge Chakwal and others PLD 2016 SC 581 rel.
Citation:2020 YLR Note 21
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 13-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


756) 25/2012 II.A. Sikandar Ali (Appellant) V/S Abdullah & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Specific Performance (Specific Performance )
Tag Line:(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---O. XXIII, R. 1(3) & 0. II, R.2---Withdrawal of suit---Fresh suit, institution of---Scope---Suit was decreed by the Trial Court but same was dismissed by the Appellate Court being barred under O.II, R.2, C.P.C.---Validity---Plaintiff was precluded from filing another suit after withdrawl of earlier suit on same "cause of action", on same "subject matter" and against the same defendant without permission to institute a fresh one-Provisions of O.XXIII, R.1(3) and O.II, R.2, C.P.C. were complementary to each other to control the litigation after litigation between the same parties on the same subject matter. Ghulam Nabi and others v. Seth Muhammad Yakoob and others PLD 1983 SC 344; Muhammad Suleman v. Ehsan Ali PLD 1983 Kar. 537; State Life Insurance of Pakistan v. Mst. Zainab Khatoon and others PLD 1987 SC AJ&K 5; Manzoor Hussain v. Rasool Bukhsh 1991 CLC 640; Qazi Shamas-ur-Rehman and another v. Mst. Chaman Dasta and others 2004 SCMR 1798 and Siddique Khan and 2 others v. Abdul Shakur Khan and another PLD 1984 SC 289 ref. Muhammad Suleman v. Ehsan Ali PLD 1983 Kar. 537; State Life Insurance of Pakistan v. Mst. Zainab Khatoon and others PLD 1987 SC AJ&K 5; Manzoor Hussain v. Rasool Bukhsh 1991 CLC 640; Qazi Shamas-ur-Rehman and another v. Mst. Chaman Dasta and others 2004 SCMR 1798 and Siddique Khan and 2 others v. Abdul Shakur Khan and another PLD 1984 SC 289 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 99---Appeal---Court fee, non-payment of---Effect---Ministerial staff of court was bound to point out non-payment of court fee and if such had been done then appellant could pay the same to avoid dismissal of appeal on account of non-payment of court fee---If such objection had been raised by the Appellate Court only then appellant could have been penalized---Jurisdiction of Appellate Court was not disputed to entertain the appeal, therefore order passed thereon was not affected adversely on account of non-payment of court fee---Impugned judgment and decree passed by the Appellate Court were protected by the provision of S.99, C.P.C. despite the fact that no court fee on the appeal was paid---Appellate Court had no power to set aside the judgment and decree on the ground of error or irregularity which had not affected the merits of the case or jurisdiction of the court---Non??payment of court fee was mere irregularity which could be corrected at any time and such irregularity had not rendered the impugned order void or without jurisdiction---Appellant (respondent) had not refused to pay the court fee and High Court could not non-suit him on the ground of filing first appeal without court fee---No punitive action could be taken against the appellant (respondent) without recourse to the provision of O. VII, R.11, C.P.C.---High Court could call upon the appellant (respondent) to pay the court fee---Appellant (respondent) was directed to deposit/pay the requisite court fee in the High Court within a specified period to rectify the irregularity occurred on account of non-payment of court fee before the first Appellate Court.
Citation:2015 PLD 155
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 09-SEP-14
Approved for Reporting


757) 241/2017 S.M.A Barbara Helena Philomina through attorney Debbie (Petitioner) V/S Marina Caroline Bond - Deceased (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 18-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


758) 589/2011 Cr.Bail Badshah alias Muhammad Saleh (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 26-AUG-11
Approved for Reporting


759) 939/2010 Suit CLIFTON BLOCK-7 RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION & OTHERS (Plaintiff) V/S ZUBAIR AHMED & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Order Vii, Rule 11 C.P.C (Allowed.)
Tag Line:(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 42 & 54---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts.23, 189 & 201---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.11, Expln.VI & O.VII, R.11---Suit for declaration and injunction---Res judicata, principle of---Rejection of plaint---Public importance issue---Plaintiffs were residents of road in question and they assailed commercialization of the road---Defendants sought rejection of plaint on the plea that commercialization of road in question had already been decided in earlier proceedings in presence of plaintiff's registered Association--- Validity--- Once registered Association of residents of the area was present before Court and 'issue' of public importance for and on behalf of residents was raised by them and the Court had decided the 'issue', the individual members or other residents of same locality were bound by the decision of Court on that particular 'issue' in which they were very much interested and they could not claim that such decision of the Court on the said 'issue' was not binding on them because they were not individually party to that judgment---Plaintiffs were no other than the community of residents of same locality and the issue re-agitated by them through the suit had already stood answered by Division Bench of High Court, therefore, earlier judgment was binding on them in terms of Expln.VI to S.11, C.P.C.---Plaintiffs abused process of Court in denying defendants to freely exercise their fundamental right to acquire, hold and 'dispose of property' guaranteed to them by Art.23 of the Constitution---Plaintiffs attempted to persuade the Court to pass orders against mandate of Arts.189 & 201 of the Constitution---Suit was dismissed with costs in circumstances.
Citation:2015 CLC 1090
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 04-DEC-14
Approved for Reporting


760) 1904/2014 Const. P. Fotile Kitchen & Home Appliances (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 PTD 1580
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 13-NOV-14
Approved for Reporting


761) 408/2011 Const. P. Saleem Shehzada (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 CLC 2077, 2020 CLD 894
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 23-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


762) 79/2017 Const. P. Qadir Bux @ Ghulam Shabir (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Citation:2019 YLR 1844
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 03-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


763) 7988/2018 Const. P. Nadeem Mumtaz Baig (Petitioner) V/S Sindh Food Authority and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 MLD 478
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 04-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


764) 4538/2016 Const. P. Riaz Ahmed Bhutto and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.428-K/2017 Riaz Ahmed and others v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


765) 4460/2012 Const. P. Marvi Aslam & Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 01-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


766) 6966/2016 Const. P. Forte Pakistan (Private) Limited (Petitioner) V/S Azam Khan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar
Order Date: 13-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


767) 704/2019 Suit Pakistan Airline Pilots Association (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan International Airlines & another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for Rejection of Plaint
Topic: Merger
Tag Line:Order VII rule 11 CPC - Rejection of Plaint sought - Suit barred in law under Order 2 Rule 2 - Application dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 27-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting


768) 5663/2020 Const. P. Jawad Ahmed and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Sect: Ind & Production and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:policy decision---Prima facie, the launching of Gulshan-e-Hadeed Housing Scheme Phase-IV was/is a policy decision which has already been taken care of by the Secretary Ministry of Industries and Production, Government of Pakistan, whereby the request of PSMC was declined for delinking of the launching of Gulshan-e-Hadeed Housing Scheme from the privatization process vide letter dated 13.04.2015. Besides the subject matter in these proceedings is a policy matter and Privatization Commission has already taken back the decision vide letter dated 16.02.2015 for the launching of aforesaid Society till the privatization of PSMC which is the policy decision of respondents; and, in the given circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere in the policy decision under its Constitutional jurisdiction, for the reasons already given hereinabove.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 01-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


769) 459/2006 I.T.R.A First Women Bank Ltd (Applicant) V/S Commissioner of Income Tax (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 10-MAR-10
Approved for Reporting


770) 4442/2016 Const. P. Dr. Ehsan Ali Palari (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 01-JUN-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2781/2017 Oil & Gas Development Company (OGDCL) thr. its Managing Director and another v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secretary M/o Petroleum & Natural Resources, Islamabad and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of+contempt proceedings suspended.


771) 449/2007 Const. P. Mst. Dadli (Petitioner) V/S The Federation of Pakistan and others. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 27-OCT-10
Approved for Reporting


772) 398/2019 Const. P. Pfizer Pakistan Pvt Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 16-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1510/2019 Pfizer Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd, Karachi v. Federation of Pakistan thr. the Secretary M/o National Health and Services, Rugulation & Coordination, Islamabad & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


773) 1351/2012 Const. P. Daleel Khan & others (Petitioner) V/S Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Service matters
Citation:2017 PLC CS Note 34
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 08-OCT-15
Approved for Reporting


774) 7700/2019 Const. P. Husnain Ali and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Health Department, Government of Sindh, whereby the petitioners may be allowed to pursue their academic medical career subject to extraordinary leave (without pay) for the required period--At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners in substance has pleaded discrimination as they were not sent for training within time, however, he has seriously submitted that their other batch mates on the same consideration were considered and were sent for training and the petitioners were left out except petitioners No.6, 9, 10, and 14.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 22-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


775) 2108/2016 Suit The City Schools (Private) Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 CLC 4
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 05-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


776) 149/1992 Civil Revision Hajiani Dhana & Ors Thr.L.Rs. (Applicant) V/S Tahir Ali & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Specific Performance (Specific Performance of Contract)
Tag Line:(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.17---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Proof---Procedure---Preponderance of evidence---Scope---Agreement of sale was required to be proved by two witnesses of execution of agreement---Rule of production of two witnesses as proof of execution of a document was not an absolute rule to be applied in every case---Every case had to be decided on its own merits both of facts and law---Need to provide proof of execution of agreement would arise when the denial had come from the executant of said agreement---Executant of agreement to sell, in the present case, had admitted the same and also the sale consideration---Each and every aspect of documents produced by the parties was to be assessed while evaluating the evidence---Preponderance of evidence had to be gathered from oral statement with reference to the documents produced by the parties---Trial Court had not examined the evidence properly---Appellate Court had rightly set aside the findings of Trial Court and decreed the suit---Revision was dismissed in circumstances. Muhammad Hafeez and another v. District Judge, Karachi East and another 2008 SCMR 398 ref. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Suit for specific performance---Maintainability---Suit for specific performance would be maintainable only when either of the party had refused to perform his part of contract---Once the two sides of a contract even during the course of litigation agreed to perform their respective obligations under the contract, court would cease to have jurisdiction and it could not pass any order except the order that the suit was dismissed for having become infructuous.
Citation:2017 CLC 564
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 03-OCT-16
Approved for Reporting


777) 496/2018 Cr.Misc. SAADULLAH (Applicant) V/S THE STATE & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 16-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


778) 5391/2020 Const. P. Haji M. Ayaz Memon (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:In view of the statement of learned AAG, let notice be issued to the Chief Secretary, Sindh, to submit complete details of such cases of the Civil / Government Servants who are facing disciplinary proceedings or criminal cases, and enjoying the posting even those who entered into plea bargaining and Voluntary Return (VR) under the NAB law. To be listed on 21.12.2020 at 11:00 a.m.
Advocates:Irtafa Ur Rehman(ADVO-19686-SBC-KHS),M. M. Aqil Awan(ADVO-10438-SBC-KHI),Advocate General Sindh(ADVO-GEN-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 02-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


779) 1798/2016 Suit Syed Ali Haider & others (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan International Airline (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Suit decreed. Independent promotion orders cannot be recalled through Admin Order No. 17/2016 without proper Notice and confronting the Plaintiffs.
Citation:2021 PLC (CS) 221
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 23-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


780) 5312/2016 Const. P. Abdullah Khan (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 20-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.516-K/2018 Abdullah Khan v. Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secy: and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


781) 5960/2017 Const. P. Raja Shoaib and Ors (Petitioner) V/S I.G Sindh Police and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 07-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting


782) 7070/2015 Const. P. Ali Sher (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary and others. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 26-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.116-K/2017 Ali Sher v. Govt. of Sindh thr. Chief Secy: Sindh Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed for Non-Prosecution


783) 273/2019 Criminal Appeal MUHAMMAD USMAN S/O MUHAMMAD ASLAM (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Mujahid Ali Thebo(ADVO-14980-SBC-KHI),Dilber Ijaz(ADVO-10718-SBC-KHI),Prosecutor General Sindh(PGS),Muhammad Naeem(ADVO-11341-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 13-JUL-21
Approved for Reporting


784) 68/2014 Cr.Acq.A. Zulfiqar Ali Baloch (Appellant) V/S Parkash & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Saleem Jessar
Order Date: 08-NOV-16
Approved for Reporting


785) 200/2003 I.T.C The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appellant) V/S M/S. Dewan Khalid Textile Mills Ltd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 09-MAR-10
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.457/2010 M/s. Dewan Khalid Textile Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU) Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Allowed.also short order


786) 1662/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Nawaz Soomro (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:disposed of in the terms of paragraph 35(iii) of the judgment dated 18.03.2016 passed by learned Sindh Service Tribunal maintained by the Honorable Supreme Court vide order dated 26.03.2018 passed in Civil Petition No.266-K and 1074 of 2016, resultantly the competent authority of respondent-WAPDA is directed to comply with the ratio of the aforesaid judgments in its letter and spirit and allow them joining from the date of their repatriation by the Sindh Government vide notification dated 5.7.2018 and the issue of their salary, for the intervening period, shall be decided by the competent authority of respondent-WAPDA accordingly within one month
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.542-K/2021 Muhammad Nawaz Soomro v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh & others,C.P.558-K/2021 The Wapda through its Director (Legal) v. Muhammad Nawaz Soomro & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed,Disposed Dismissed


787) 630/2019 Const. P. Dr. Mushtaq Ahmed Nizamani (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:We have noticed that the respondents have complied with the direction of the Honorable Supreme Court passed in Crl. Orig. P No.15-k of 2016 in C.A. 30-K of 2014 and Crl. M.A 37-K of 2017 in Crl. Orig. P No.15-k of 2016 and petitioner has been given a proforma promotion in BPS-20 with effect from 12.3.2017 one day before his retirement from service on 13.3.2017; thus no further indulgence of this court is required in the matter. It is well-settled that proforma promotion cannot be awarded to a retired government servant with retrospective effect as per dicta laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Government of Pakistan and others vs. Hameed Akhtar Niazi and others, PLD 2003 SC 110--Dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 19-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


788) 4/2017 Const. P. Scherazade Jamali (Petitioner) V/S Hasim Gillani & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Family Courts Act, 1964 (section 14(1)(b)), Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, 1997 (sections 105), Guardian and Ward Act, 1890 (Section 25), Guardian and Ward Act, 1890 (47), Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, 1997 (Section 102 subsection 15 ), Guardian and Ward Act, 1890 (Section 9), West Pakistan Family Court Rules, 1965 (Rule 6), Citizenship Act, 1951
Tag Line:The primary object of the Guardian & Ward Court or for that matter appellate Court was to discover as to where the welfare of the ward lies and how such welfare can be effectively achieved and maintained and should not have concerned with the visitation rights of father. --Jurisdiction Issue- The child may be an American national by birth and he may have been permanently residing in Kuwait with parents but he is a dual national. When the respondent/ father surrendered to the jurisdiction of the trial Court by moving an application under section 25 of the Guardian & Wards Act, it was promptly responded and replied by filing written statement and jurisdiction conceded by petitioner. --Once petitioner acquiesced to the jurisdiction, she cannot approbate and reprobate at the same time. The question of jurisdiction even if made dependent on ordinary residence of ward, it may not be a pure question of law that can be assailed at any forum or at any time. For that it has to be specifically pleaded so that the facts in this regard be brought to the notice of the Court. It is, thus, not a simple question of law rather a mixed question of law and facts which requires determination through evidence. --Movement or Restriction in Movement of ward-The ward belongs to a family which can afford a better upbringing, education and environment either in Pakistan or anywhere in the world which was restricted and curtailed by restriction in his movement. The Courts below should not have seen welfare only from the angle that the father/respondent must not miss his opportunity to see his child but it must also be seen from the angle as to whether a ward who is capable of studying abroad, in case the opportunities are available to him, should he be deprived of on account of the fact that father must not miss a visiting opportunity? --In any other case it would have been the welfare considering the situation of the ward while being at Karachi and only Pakistani national but the situation here is different as the child is privileged to have access to any educational institution around the world including Pakistan. An educational institute or an environment for which most of the children could only dream for. Every child has its own peculiar circumstances and the welfare demands may vary. The restriction in the movement in the present case appeared to be a tool to settle score with mother/petitioner but it will not serve as the welfare of the child. The father/respondent who had raised serious allegations against the mother/petitioner as he claimed that she is not fit to take care of ward yet is not serious in having the custody of the ward, although none of them stands proved in evidence. There are ways and mechanism to regulate the movement which is not achieved by of restricting the movement.
Citation:2018 PLD Sindh 377
Advocates:Kazim Hassan(ADVO-2630-SBC-KHI),Sameer Ghazanfar(ADVO-11222-SBC-KHI),Advocate General Sindh(ADVO-GEN-SBC-KHI),Shahan Karimi(ADVO-15097-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 27-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1034/2018 Hashim Gillani v. Scherazade Jamali & others,C.A.1355/2018 Hashim Gillani v. Scherazade Jamali & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of,Disposed


789) 13/2010 II.A. Muhammad Shafiq (Appellant) V/S Muhammad Suleman Jameel & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Sind Rented Premises Act - Eviction---15
Tag Line:(a) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 21---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), 0.1, R. 10--- Ejectment proceedings against tenant---Remedies for a stranger against the order of Rent Controller---Principles---Plaintiff filed suit for declaration to the effect that order of Rent Controller declining his request in the case to become a party was wrong---Validity---Plaintiff preferred an application under 0.1, R. 10, C.P.C. before Rent Controller which was dismissed and no appeal or revision against the said order was filed--- Order passed by the court during civil litigation in exercise of original or appellate jurisdiction could be attacked alongwith final order in appeal---Plaintiff should have filed appeal after final ejectment order and impugned both the orders viz; order of dismissal of application under 0.1, R.10, C.P.C. and final ejectment order---Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was special law and plaintiff had no option except to find remedy under said law---Plaintiff should have instantly filed an appeal or revision or even constitutional petition to press his grievance against the dismissal of his application under 0. 1, R. 10, C.P.C. by Rent Controller---Stranger to the proceedings or third party against the order of Rent Controller might have two remedies open to him i.e. an application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. for recalling or review of the order based on fraud or filing a separate suit but he could only pursue one remedy he had initiated first or. earlier in point of time and having done so the other remedy should stand forfeited---Plaintiff had already entered into jurisdiction of Rent Controller and his right to avail other remedy of a separate suit was forfeited---Plaintiff had chosen wrong forum for filing a civil suit after final ejectment order---Plaintiff should have not abandoned the proceedings before the Rent Controller on dismissal of his application under 0.1, R.10, C.P.C.---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.
Citation:2014 YLR 1960
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 30-MAY-14
Approved for Reporting


790) 322/2021 S.M.A Aiman Fatima D/o Hasan Mahmood (Petitioner) V/S Fozia Hasan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 28-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


791) 2/2009 Conf.Case Ref. made by 3rd ADJ-South (Appellant) V/S None (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 21-JAN-14
Approved for Reporting


792) 398/2020 S.M.A Batul Husain Dharamsey d/o Hussain Dharamsey (Petitioner) V/S Nil (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


793) 75/2017 Suit M/s. Rashid Silk Mills. (Plaintiff) V/S Sui Southern Gas Co., Limited. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 SBLR Sindh 617
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author)
Order Date: 12-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


794) 644/1986 Const. P. Karachi Bulk Storage & Terminals (pvt) Ltd. (Petitioner) V/S Collector Of Courts & Excise & Lands & C (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 28-MAR-11
Approved for Reporting


795) 5025/2016 Const. P. Imdad Ali Abro & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:the petitioners are seeking the up-gradation of the post of Computer Operator/Assistant Computer Programmer BS-16 to 17--we are clear that petitioners proceeded on erroneous premises. On the issue of up-gradation, we seek guidance from the decisions of the Honorable Supreme Court rendered in the cases of the Government of Pakistan M/o. Railways v. Jamshed Hussain Cheema and others, 2016 SCMR 442, Regional Commissioner Income Tax, Northern Region, Islamabad, and another Vs. Syed Munawar Ali and others (2017 PLC (C.S.) 1030) and Federal Public Service Commission v. Anwar-ul-Haq (2017 SCMR 890). Therefore, in our view, the petitioners have been unable to make out a case for the up-gradation/re-designation of their posts in BPS-17 with retrospective effect, based on discrimination under Article 25 of the Constitution.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 28-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


796) 938/2018 Suit Shan Foods (Pvt) Limited. (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Sales Tax
Tag Line:Sales Tax Act 1990 - Schedule VI - Exemption of Sales Tax on -Iodised Salt - held - Yes: Injunction granted - Suit decreed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


797) 2353/2014 Const. P. Pakistan Airlines Pilots Association and others (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Internatinal Airline Corporation and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 23-SEP-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.839-K/2016 Pakistan Airline Pilots and others v. P.I.A. and another,C.A.585/2018 Pakistan Airline Pilots and others v. P.I.A. and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Disposed Dismissed


798) 344/2015 Const. P. M/s. Haider Industries and others (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Regulatory Duty
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Saeed-ud-Din Nasir, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah
Order Date: 28-AUG-15
Approved for Reporting


799) 2531/2019 Const. P. M/s GUINAULT SA PA ORLEAN SOLOGNE (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 YLR 692
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.85-K/2020 M/s Guinault SA.PA Orleans Sologne v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


800) 1018/2021 Const. P. Riaz Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Chief Sect: Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:the decision of PSB-II for promoting the private respondent No.8 in BPS-19 against future vacancy in absence of ACRs is/was an erroneous decision--ACRs--it is directed that the Government of Sindh shall ensure that in future before convening the meeting of PSB and/or DPC for considering the cases for promotion of civil / Government servants, the department concerned shall provide the complete set of ACRs / PERs of the concerned officer to PSB / DPC well in advance so that the cases for promotion should be decided without any delay. It may be observed that if the promotion of any civil / Government servant is deferred or delayed after passing of this order for want of ACR / PER, the Secretary of the department concerned, the competent authority, and all officials responsible for deferring or delaying the promotion shall be held personally responsible for defiance of the above direction of this Court.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 10-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


801) 7097/2018 Const. P. Sindh Petroleum & CNG Dealer Assoication and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 CLC 851
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 03-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting


802) 43/2016 M.A. M/s. Idara-e-Noor-e-Haq through Sec. (Appellant) V/S Public at Large (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925)--- ----Ss. 272, 269, 299, 300 & 384---Appeal---Probate, grant of---Ownerless property---Application for grant of probate under S.272 Succession Act, 1925, was filed by appellant but Trial Court dismissed the application---Validity---Once it was found that none was available to claim ownership of immovable property in question in his own right or by way of inheritance, such property should be treated as an ownerless property---Once Court was satisfied that the property was rendered ownerless, it was the duty of Court to protect it from being misappropriated or wasted or damaged---Court could appoint Curator under S.195 of Succession Act, 1925, to takeover possession of the property pending final determination of fate of proceedings---Court could have also taken prompt action under S.269 of Succession Act, 1925, for protection of such property---Jurisdiction of High Court under S.300 of Succession Act, 1925, was concurrent with District Judge in exercise of power under Succession Act, 1925---High Court appointed its official as a Curator to protect the property in question and directed him to take over the possession immediately---High Court declined to interfere in the order passed by Trial Court---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. 1993 CLC 1552 ref.
Citation:2020 PLD Sindh Note 563
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 11-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


803) 6192/2020 Const. P. Imtiaz Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:quo warranto
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 22-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


804) 8356/2018 Const. P. Qamar Shahid Siddiqui (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 18-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting


805) 1641/2012 Suit SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD. (Plaintiff) V/S K.E.S.C LTD. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Attachment before Judgment
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 07-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


806) 3960/2021 Const. P. Syed Asif Shah (Petitioner) V/S Mazhar Javed and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Nusrat Sultana(ADVO-414-SBC-NWB),Tahir Hasan Qureshi(ADVO-4229-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Khalid(ADVO-8216-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Ahmed Ali M. Shaikh, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 17-SEP-21
Approved for Reporting


807) 7101/2015 Const. P. Anwar Ahmed and others (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 12-SEP-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.634-K/2017 Anwar Ahmed and others v. Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority and others,C.P.4383/2017 Clifton Cantonment Board, Karachi v. Anwar Ahmed & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of,Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


808) 438/2016 Const. P. Imran Badar (Petitioner) V/S PO Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 21-JUN-16
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.142-K/2016 Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secy: and others v. Imran Badar,C.P.582-K/2016 Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secy: and others v. Imran Badar Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed ,Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed


809) 1874/2019 Const. P. Dr. Arfana Mallah (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio(Author)
Order Date: 10-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


810) 5430/2020 Const. P. Imad Samad (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act (SRO 833(I)/2018 Section 19), Import Policy , Rules of Business, 1973 (Schedule-II), Custom Act (Section 19), Import Policy Order 2020, Rules of Business, 1973, Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1950
Tag Line:- 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.
Advocates:Deputy Attorney General(),Qazi Umair Ali(ADVO-17282-SBC-KHS),Shahab Imam(ADVO-19121-SBC-KHE)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro
Order Date: 10-SEP-21
Approved for Reporting


811) 7383/2015 Const. P. Pakistan Medical Association (Centre) (Petitioner) V/S Chancellor Dow University of Health Sciences & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Additional Charge), Contempt Proceeding
Tag Line:Professor Dr. Masood Hameed Khan/Respondent No.3 filed listed application for initiation of contempt proceedings against the alleged contemnors on account of their willful, and deliberate act of disobeying order passed by this Court. The learned law officer after consultation with the official present in Court, Additional Secretary (HE),Governor House informed that the Summary on the issue of 8appointment of Vice Chancellor is in process before the Governor Sindh/Chancellor and an order will be passed on the said summary within a week. This undertaking has also been given by the above named official . we are of the view that the same is pending in Suit No.893/2017, as such we would refrain to pass any order in this regard, because the same may prejudice the case of either party in the said Suit. assignment of the Additional Charge of Vice Chancellor of DUHS to Professor Dr. Khawar Saeed Jamali is concerned the same has already been taken care of in order dated19.04.2017 passed in Suit No.893/2017 .In view of the above discussion, at this juncture, we are of the view that no contempt of this Court's order dated 26.04.2016 is made out. Therefore, the listed applications accordingly dismissed in the above terms.
Citation:2018 PLC (CS) Note 71
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 24-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


812) 4604/2021 Const. P. Sohail Hameed (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan
Tag Line:It is not only the petitioner for whom the respondents, including federal and provincial governments, have taken this decision but in fact the respondents in pursuit of their responsibilities to take care of the health of entire nation, have issued numerous notifications, circulars to curb the virus spread. Petitioner, instead of being supportive, is being troublesome in the smooth operation of effective measures undertaken by government. The government is primarily responsible to take care of health of 220 million citizens of Pakistan and hence the desire of one person being petitioner cannot supersede the demand of ever-growing spread of pandemic Covid-19. The Sindh Government has already taken steps and are monitoring it periodically under the umbrella of Sindh Epidemic Diseases Act, 2014. Section 3 of ibid Act enables the government to take strict measures as they deem fit and proper in case the provincial government feels the necessity of enforcing prescribed measures to curb the threatened situation. ---This Covid-19 is exceeding and spreading for a number of reasons that it is new virus meaning that no one has immunity for this virus. It is highly contagious, meaning it spreads fast. Its novelty meaning scientists are still not completely sure as to how it behaves since it is changing its form and producing different variants and since they have a very limited history to go on. It is being reported worldwide that Covid-19 will have its short medium and long term effects for general population, health care workers, patients and other citizens. As our general responsibility we need to think ahead of ourselves and think beyond and stop being selfish, not only for our survival but for the survival of our population. The only way is to support the health care system.
Advocates:In Person(INP)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 31-JUL-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1106-K/2021 Sohail Hameed v. Federation of Pakistan & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned


813) 4035/2019 Const. P. Bashir Ahmed Kalwar (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Declare the supersession of the petitioner made by the Respondent No.02 / CSB and the competent authority through impugned order dated 06.06.2018 as illegal--Direct the respondents to consider the case of promotion of petitioner in BPS-20, in terms of original reference of December, 2016--when a civil/public servant is recommended for supersession by the Central Selection Board (CSB) and the recommendation of the CSB is approved by the competent authority, what is its effect, and whether supersession is punishment?
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 31-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


814) 62/2010 H.C.A Muhammad Naved Aslam & Ors. (Appellant) V/S Mst.Aisha Siddiqui & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 02-FEB-11
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.166-K/2011 Muhammad Naveed Aslam and others v. Mst. Aisha Siddiqui and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


815) 10/2012 H.C.A Pangrio Sugar Mills Limited (Appellant) V/S Bankers Equity Limited & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 CLD 637
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 04-SEP-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.368-K/2014 M/s Pangrio Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Bankers Equity Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


816) 2393/2019 Const. P. Manzar Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 23-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.430-K/2019 Federal Board of Revenue thr. its Chairman v. Manzar Hussain & others,C.P.484-K/2019 Amer Rashid Shaikh v. Manzar Hussain & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Infructuous,Disposed Dismissed as Infructuous


817) 144/2019 Cr.J.A ABDUL REHMAN S/O DEEN MUHAMMAD (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 02-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.A.176/2021 The State v. Abdul Rehman Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned s (-) Mr. Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, J


818) 1171/2011 Suit ZULFIQAR SHAKOOR (Plaintiff) V/S M/S. QUETTA TOWN CO-OPY (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 31-OCT-12
Approved for Reporting


819) 1522/2016 Suit Nirmal Das (Plaintiff) V/S Tekchand (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2017 YLR 336
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 16-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


820) 1700/2020 Cr.Bail Naresh Kumar @ Jani son of Shaman Lal (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Rashida Asad(Author)
Order Date: 08-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.14-K/2021 Naresh Kumar @ Jani v. The State Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Disposed of


821) 395/2016 H.C.A Jamshoro Joint Venture Limited (Appellant) V/S Sui Southern Gas Company Limited (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 29-JUN-18
Approved for Reporting


822) 1362/2011 Const. P. Muhammad Sultan (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Yousuf (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Zafaruddin(ADVO-3268-SBC-KHI),Syed Abdul Waheed(ADVO-3255-SBC-KHI),Saify Ali Khan(ADVO-6773-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 28-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


823) 354/2010 Cr.Appeal Heman and another (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 13-NOV-14
Approved for Reporting


824) 1360/2015 Const. P. Adil Rashid (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.393-K/2019 Adil Rashid v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secy: M/o Ports & Shipping and others,C.A.20-K/2020 Adil Rashid v. Federation of Pakistan thr. Secy: M/o Ports & Shipping and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Pending


825) 10/2012 J.M Mrs.Syma Mahnaz Vayani & others (Petitioner) V/S Molasses Export Company Pvt. Ltd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 SBLR Sindh 1276
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 31-JAN-13
Approved for Reporting


826) 6234/2014 Const. P. Mehr Iqbal Siddiqui (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Regularisation of Employee), Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Citation:2017 SBLR Sindh 1046, 2017 SBLR Sindh 1419
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 03-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.86-K/2017 Mehar Iqbal Siddiqui v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


827) 6629/2016 Const. P. Touseef Nazeer (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 23-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.19-K/2019 Touseef Nazeer v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


828) 304/2020 Suit Husein Industries Ltd (Plaintiff) V/S Sui Southern Gas Company Limited & others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:1. A bank guarantee is an independent contract between the surety (bank) and the creditor (beneficiary of the guarantee), and as such the bank guarantee is to be construed on its own terms independent of the underlying contract between the creditor and the principal debtor, and irrespective of claims pending interse the creditor and principal debtor. Rel: National Construction Ltd. v. Aiwan-e-Iqbal Authority (PLD 1994 SC 311); and Shipyard K. Damen International v. Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works Ltd. (PLD 2003 SC 191). 2. Mobilization Guarantees are generally not subject to a restraining order even if there is a dispute between the parties to the underlying contract. However, in cases of guarantees other than Mobilization Guarantees, the Court have granted or refused injunction to restrain encashment depending upon the literal words used in the guarantee. Rel: National Grid Company v. Government of Pakistan (1999 SCMR 2367); and Shipyard K. Damen International ibid.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 09-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


829) 966/2008 I.T.R.A M/s. Dewan Farooque Motors (Ltd.) (Applicant) V/S Comm. of Income Tax (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Athar Saeed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 28-MAR-11
Approved for Reporting


830) 2135/2021 Const. P. Noman Ali Bhatti (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Sindh Education Foundation --we conclude that there is no illegality, infirmity, or material irregularity in the impugned letters dated 06.02.2020 & 30.11.2020 issued by the respondent-SEF. Besides, the issue of continue in service, since he is facing the NAB reference based on moral turpitude, thus we cannot order the competent authority to continue his service.
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 30-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


831) 21/2011 II.A. Mst. Kishwar Begum & Ors (Appellant) V/S Rasheed Ahmed Qureshi & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Specific Performance , Civil Procedure Code CPC (Specific Performance of Contract )
Tag Line:Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 12 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12(2)---Suit for specific performance of agreement and permanent injunction---Agreement to sell---Proof of ownership of vendor---Scope---Plaintiff filed suit for specific performance of agreement and permanent injunction wherein he claimed that he and paternal grandson of original owner entered into sale agreement for which he paid earnest money---Trial Court, on failure of vendor to file written statement, decreed the suit ex parte---During execution proceedings, rival claimant of subject property filed application under S.12(2), C.P.C. and got the ex parte decree set aside---Trial Court decreed the suit of plaintiff---Rival claimant filed an appeal which was allowed; Appellate Court remanded the case and proposed two additional issues---Trial Court, on remand, reversed its earlier findings and dismissed the suit---Appeal filed by plaintiff was allowed and suit was decreed---Validity---Rival claimant had filed application under S.12(2), C.P.C. to set aside the initial ex parte judgment by claiming that she was owner of the subject property on the basis of an agreement of sale with legal heirs of original owner---Perusal of her written statement showed that after setting aside of decree she had given up her claim on the subject property on the basis of sale agreement; she did not mention in her written statement that original owner was survived by three daughters and that she had purchased subject property nor did she made a counter prayer for declaration of ownership of suit property---Said lady had not filed any independent proceedings for seeking declaration of ownership of subject property---Original gift deed in favour of grandson of original owner was produced by plaintiff---Original gift deed in the hands of plaintiff was far more strong and cogent evidence of title as compared to the so-called power of attorney which was executed by unidentified daughters of original owner---Second appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.
Citation:2019 MLD 1044
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 14-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.502/2019 Mst. Kishwar Begum (decd) thr. her LRs v. Rasheed Ahmed Qureshi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


832) 58/2015 Spl.Anti.Ter.A. Muhammad Jawad and another (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio
Order Date: 04-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


833) 391/2011 Cr.Misc. Syed Jawaid Haider Qazmi (Applicant) V/S S.I. Muhammad Zaffaran and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 12-AUG-13
Approved for Reporting


834) 284/2018 H.C.A Famous Brands (Private) Limited (Appellant) V/S Samsonite IP Holdings S.A.R.L & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order VII R.11), TRADE MARK
Tag Line:By moving an application under order VII rule 11 a litigant does not surrender to the jurisdiction of the Court. The jurisdiction is conferred by law based on facts. A litigant may be right or wrong in asserting that the Court had no jurisdiction or that the suit is barred by law. But, this act of litigant would neither confer and/or bestow nor take away any jurisdiction which in fact is conferred by law. Actions of parties prior to litigation leads to constitution of a cause to initiate proceedings in Court of competent jurisdiction. - If the two applications were not moved simultaneously and would have been filed one after the other, will a litigant still be debarred from filing the other application such as Order VII Rule 10 CPC.A simple answer to this proposition is ???No??? as rejection of plaint has its own reasons whereas return of plaint has its own. In an application under order VII rule 11 a litigant has only to show that it does not disclose a cause of action; the relief claimed is undervalued or is not properly valued and that the suit appears to be barred by law. None of these rational is available while entertaining an application under order VII rule 10 CPC, which is for return of plaint on numerous counts including but not limited to pecuniary jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction. Courts when plaint is presented are required to see whether they are bestowed with pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction whereas under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Courts are required to see whether it is barred by law. The Court had to apply law to decide the issue of jurisdiction; it is the law that confers or takes away the jurisdiction of the Court and not based on moving of application under the aforesaid provision of law. Another proposition is that while entertaining and hearing application under order VII rule 11 CPC Court is empowered to return the plaint if the circumstances so warrants as required under the law. -Section 86(3) of the Trademark Ordinance, 2001 provides that owner of the trademark which is entitled to protection under the Paris Convention as a well-known trademark shall be entitled to restrain by injunction the use in Pakistan of a trademark which, or the essential part of which, is identical or deceptively similar to the well-known trademark in relation to identical or similar goods or services, where the use is likely to cause confusion or where such use cause dilution of the distinctive quality of the well-known trademark. - At the very outset there is nothing in the instant case which could attract Section 81 of Trademark Ordinance, 2001. The proprietor of the mark never gave up their right or it has not been demonstrated that for continuous period of five years from the date of alleged registration (in favour of user) in the use of registered mark in Pakistan, the proprietor was aware of it and that the proprietor ceased to be entitled on the basis of that earlier trademark or other rights. The engagement of the appellant with the respondent itself is enough to understand that there was no case of acquiescence at all. In fact the appellant conceded when they assumed the role of a distributor. -The appellate Court normally avoid interfering in the orders of the interlocutory nature involving exercise of discretion as the appellate Court cannot substitute its own discretion unless when the discretion has been exercised arbitrarily, capriciously, perversely or where the Court has ignored certain principles regulating grant or refusal of injunction. The appellate Court is not required to reassess the material to reach a conclusion different from the one reached by the trial Court/learned Single Judge on the consideration that another view is possible.
Citation:2021 CLD 1008
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 19-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4034/2021 Famous Brands (Private) Limited, Lahore v. Samsonite IP Holdings S.a.r.l., Luxembourg through its Attorney Abdul Rasheed, Karachi and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


835) 71/2008 Suit.B SONERI BANK LTD (Plaintiff) V/S CLASSIC DENIM MILLS PVT LTD (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 12-SEP-12
Approved for Reporting


836) 672/2015 Const. P. Abdul Karim (Petitioner) V/S IIIrd Additional Session Judge SBA and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2018 YLR 261
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 27-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


837) 21/2012 J.M MS. ZAINAB (Petitioner) V/S MUHAMMAD JAWED & OTHERS (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 SBLR Sindh 16
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 09-OCT-12
Approved for Reporting


838) 323/2007 Suit M/S.FRIENDS ASSOCIATES BUILDERS (Plaintiff) V/S TOWN MUNICIPAL ADMINSTRATION (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 12-MAY-12
Approved for Reporting


839) 1342/2007 Suit MUHAMMAD SHAFI (Appellant) V/S SYED CHAN PIR SHAH & ORS (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Advocates:Liaquat Hussain Khan(ADVO-8341-SBC-KHI),Mahboob Aftab Khan(ADVO-7393-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Aslam Khan(ADVO-8086-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Arif Khan(ADVO-2437-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 31-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


840) 7/2016 J.M Muhammad Iqbal Pirani. (Applicant) V/S Khurram Ashraf & Others. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (12 (2) C.P.C Allowed. )
Tag Line:Framing of Issues not mandatory. In exceptional cases while deciding 12(2) application, main case may also be decided.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 25-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


841) 518/2020 Const. P. Abdul Haleem Chachar & others. (Petitioner) V/S P.O. Sindh & others. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: Amenity Plot (Conversion of amenity plot into Residential / commercial)
Tag Line:For the reasons noted above, the impugned action of converting the Amenity Plot reserved for playground situated at Sindh Cooperative Housing Society, Sukkur into residential plots by the present as well as previous Management of Sindh Cooperative Housing Society, Sukkur is declared to be against the rights of petitioners of Constitution Petition No.D-518 of 2021 and others and a result of an arbitrary exercise of power, therefore, is set aside. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to restore the amenity Plot reserved for Playground situated at Sindh Cooperative Housing Society, Sukkur to its original position in accordance with the sanctioned plan of this area.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


842) 6145/2018 Const. P. M/s Korea Marine Transport Co. Ltd & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act (Section 14A)
Tag Line:Custom Act (Section 14A). Vires challenged - Matter already decided by a DB Judgment in the case of Qasim International Container Terminal V/s. Fed. of Pakistan (CP No.D-4867/2013).
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 08-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.563-K/2021 M/s. Korea Marine Transport Co. Ltd. & another v. Federation of Pakistan & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


843) 81/2014 Cr.J.A KARIM BUX LASHARI S/O AYOUB (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio(Author)
Order Date: 11-SEP-19
Approved for Reporting


844) 357/2012 Cr.Bail Khuda Bukhsh and 4 others (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 18-SEP-13
Approved for Reporting


845) 4077/2016 Const. P. Yar Muhammad Bozdar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Repatriation, from the appointment as Assistant Commissioner (BPS-17) in Ex-PCS Cadre by way of nomination, to his parent department i.e. Board of Revenue, Sindh---we are not impressed with the grounds urged by the petitioner in his petition for the simple reason that the appointment of the petitioner in Ex-PCS cadre (BS-17) had already been declared as illegal by the Honorable Supreme Court and ordered his repatriation to his parent department i.e. Board of Revenue--In our view, since the directions of the Honorable Supreme Court in the aforesaid matters are still in the field, we are bound to follow it under the Constitution. Besides the respondents have issued the impugned notification in pursuance of the orders passed by the Honorable Supreme Court in the aforesaid proceedings, therefore, no indulgence of this Court is required in the present matter--Dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 17-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


846) 2352/2012 Const. P. Shoukat Ali (Petitioner) V/S Special Judge Customs & Taxation & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 PTD 42
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 02-NOV-13
Approved for Reporting


847) 121/2010 I. A Asif Kudia (Appellant) V/S M/s. KASB Bank Limited & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 10-JUN-14
Approved for Reporting


848) 135/2020 Spl.Anti.Ter.A. MUHAMMAD SOHAIL S/O JAHAN SHAH (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Section 353/324/34 PPC
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 22-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.48-K/2021 The State through Prosecutor General Sindh v. Muhammad Sohail Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


849) 52/2006 Suit.B National Bank of Pakistan (Plaintiff) V/S M/S ARK Garments Industry (Pvt.) Ltd. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 15-JAN-14
Approved for Reporting


850) 51/2005 Cr.Appeal Abdullah Bhutto (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sadiq Hussain Bhatti, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi
Order Date: 12-NOV-14
Approved for Reporting


851) 272/2013 Cr.J.A Muh (Appellant) V/S Party-2 (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar
Order Date: 30-MAR-16
Approved for Reporting


852) 2949/2014 Const. P. Abdullah Mushtaq (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 13-APR-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.830-K/2018 Karachi Metropolitan Corporation v. Abdullah Mushtaq and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Not Pressed


853) 3606/2010 Const. P. Khayabane Saddi Rizwan Abbasi Resident Trust & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 31-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


854) 108/2007 Cr.Rev Ali Raza (Applicant) V/S Haji Mir Muhammad and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 12-MAR-10
Approved for Reporting


855) 67/2016 Cr.Rev ALEEMUDDIN S/O ABDUL QAVI (Applicant) V/S BALBAN HAMEED & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 (Section 3 & 4)
Tag Line:Illegal Dispossession Act (XI of 2005)--- ----Ss. 3 & 4---Illegal dispossession---Appreciation of evidence---Complainant had alleged that he was absolute and exclusive owner of the suit property being purchaser of the same---Proposed accused persons/respondents had encroached upon the same without any lawful authority---Record showed that complaint was filed along with the report of police inquiry---Documents annexed with the criminal revision against the proposed accused persons/respondents were copies of documents from an earlier complaint, which was dismissed---Basic ingredients of a complaint in terms of S. 3 of the Act were missing---Allegation of use of force for dispossession of the appellant/ complainant from the premises in question was not mentioned anywhere in the complaint---Even date of dispossession was not given in the memo---Allegedly, plot was purchased by complainant from attorney of the original owner but power of attorney was not on the record---Complainant was not in possession of suit plot for over twenty years as the plot was not demarcated---Earlier complaint of complainant/appellant was dismissed and if he was aggrieved by the disposal of his earlier complaint, he should have filed appeal/revision---Filing a fresh complaint on the same facts was not permissible---Circumstances established that dispute, in the present case, of civil nature and could only be resolved in civil court---Application was, therefore dismissed in circumstances.
Citation:2018 YLR 41
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 18-APR-17
Approved for Reporting


856) 761/2011 Cr.Bail Asghar Ali alias Ghoro (Applicant) V/S P.O Sindh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 23-OCT-12
Approved for Reporting


857) 7731/2019 Const. P. Javed Khan (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:promotion in PSO
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 24-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


858) 3525/2013 Const. P. Ghulam Rasool Saand (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-APR-18
Approved for Reporting


859) 94/2019 Const. P. Allah Dino & Other (Petitioner) V/S P.O. Sindh & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 07-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1897/2019 Munawar Ahmed Narejo & others v. Province of Sindh thr. Secretary School Education & Litracy Department, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


860) 1702/2007 Const. P. Federation of Pakistan & another. (Petitioner) V/S Official Assignee & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 17-JUN-19
Approved for Reporting


861) 154/2015 Cr.Rev ALI MUHAMMAD S/O LATE HAJI MOOSA (Applicant) V/S SHAHZAD S/O ALI MUHAMMAD & ANOTHER (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 YLR 360
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 25-JUL-17
Approved for Reporting


862) 3472/2012 Const. P. M. Afzal Kausar (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Appointment)
Citation:2019 PLC (CS) 1258
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 27-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.544-K/2018 Muhammad Afzal Kausar v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


863) 39/2010 II.A. M/s. Habib Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. (Appellant) V/S M/s. State Life Insurance Corporation (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 10-OCT-16
Approved for Reporting


864) 48/2018 Cr.J.A Jhangal Dahani (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Tag Line:Against Order of Trial Court (Death Sentence)
Hon'be Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 27-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


865) 4430/2014 Const. P. High Court Bar Association Hyderabad (Petitioner) V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sadiq Hussain Bhatti, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 03-AUG-15
Approved for Reporting


866) 1845/2013 Const. P. Wajid Ali Memon (Petitioner) V/S Civil Judge and JM-1 Tando Muhammad Khan and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 24-OCT-13
Approved for Reporting


867) 4433/2012 Const. P. Abdul Waheed & Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 21-DEC-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.298/2018 Sajid Hussain & others v. Province of Sindh thr. Chief Secretary, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


868) 1662/2016 Const. P. Muhammad Uris and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 15-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


869) 3803/2020 Const. P. Suhaila Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:whether the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of her previous service rendered with effect from 1971 till her reinstatement/re-employment in the year 1990 or not?
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 28-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4282/2021 Pakistan International Airlines Corporation thr. its Chief Human Resource Officer, Karachi and others v. Sohaila Hussain and another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted.to be fixed after 3 months.


870) 4965/2020 Const. P. Muhammad Hassan Nadeem & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Model Custom Collectorate and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Search and seizure.
Citation:2021 PTD 764
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 22-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


871) 3685/2017 Const. P. Shamsuddin Dal (Petitioner) V/S Director General NAB (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 01-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting


872) 229/2014 Cr.Appeal Faiz Ahmed (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 15-SEP-15
Approved for Reporting


873) 99/2011 J.M M/S. BESROCK (PVT) LTD. (Petitioner) V/S PAKISTAN STEEL MILLS CORP (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2013 CLD 719
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 31-OCT-12
Approved for Reporting


874) 162/2012 Const. P. Muhammad Rafiq. (Petitioner) V/S Officer Incharge National Database & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 27-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


875) 1731/2016 Cr.Bail Muhammad Bilal (Appellant) V/S the State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 29-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


876) 12/2020 M.A. Awais Aziz (Appellant) V/S Learned Presiding Officer Hyderabad & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 01-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


877) 62/2006 Const. P. General Tyre & Rubber Co. Ltd. (Petitioner) V/S Shah Zareen & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah
Order Date: 11-FEB-16
Approved for Reporting


878) 67/2016 Suit Fashion Knit Industries (Plaintiff) V/S Sui Southern as Co. Ltd. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973, Pakistan Economic Survey of 2014-15
Tag Line:Impugned Sunday Closure Notices are illegal, unlawful and ultra vires the Constitution
Citation:2017 CLC Note 141
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 11-NOV-16
Approved for Reporting


879) 2911/2012 Const. P. Mohammad Essa (Appellant) V/S Muhammad Siddique & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 05-DEC-12
Approved for Reporting


880) 252/2021 Cr.Bail Ahmed Ali @ Ali Bhutto and another (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Tag Line:Post Arrest Bail
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 16-JUL-21
Approved for Reporting


881) 2829/2010 Const. P. M/s.Iqbal & Sons (Petitioner) V/S CDGK through DCO & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
No rule is prescribed under Sindh Public Procurement Rules, 2010, whereby on rejection of a tender to the lowest bidder, the second lowest bidder can be considered as the successful bidder on the same terms but the same states that negotiations with the bidder are not permissible in terms of Rule 52 and 83 of the Sindh Public Procurement Rules 2010. It is trite principle of law that a public functionary while performing function under the law, rule and regulation, is required to adhere to such law, rule and regulation in its letter and spirit. The discretion vested in a public functionary is to be exercised strictly in accordance with law in a reasonable and transparent manner and not under a colorful exercise of authority. Though, while exercising constitutional jurisdiction, there is no absolute bar in entertaining the grievances of the aggrieved person against the orders or actions of public functionaries, however, such discretion is to be exercised rarely in cases where there is some jurisdictional error or gross violation of law and the alternate remedy is not considered to be efficacious under the facts and circumstances of the case. Detailed principle as per rules explained. In such circumstances, the case is remanded back to the respondents to examine the claim of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and the relevant rules and dispose of the same within a period of seven days after providing proper opportunity to the petitioner and if the petitioner still fails to justify his claim he may avail the alternate remedy before the forum provided in terms of Rule 31 of Sindh Public Procurement Rules, 2010, whereafter the petitioner may avail any other remedy as available to him under the facts and circumstances of the case. The instant petition stands disposed of in the above terms alongwith listed applications.
Tag Line:Sindh Public Procurement Rules, 2010.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Mr. Justice Mushir Alam
Order Date: 16-NOV-10
Approved for Reporting


882) 1892/2018 Const. P. Faheem Ali Gambheer (Petitioner) V/S P.O. Sindh & others. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan
Tag Line: Mst. Faryal Talpur and Giyanoo Mal seek review/recall order of this Court c whereby their Membership was ordered to be suspended on account of their failure to curb the dog bite cases in their Constituencies. The Chief Secretary Sindh and Secretary Local Govt. Department Government of Sindh are directed to pay compensation in the shape of Diyat, Arsh or Daman amount (as the case may be) in terms of amount specified through latest Notification issued by Government of Pakistan to the bereaved families of the deceased of dog bite cases so also to the seriously injured victims and victims of the Dog bite cases within 15 days??? time after claim of the legal heirs of deceased and injured persons. It is made clear that the deceased and seriously injured of Rato Dero and Jamshoro shall also be compensated at the first instance. petitions stand disposed of.
Citation:2021 SBLR Sindh Note 420
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3707/2020 Noor Hassan and others v. Fahim Ali and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


883) 2325/2009 Const. P. Sultan Ahmed Siddiqui & others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 17-JAN-11
Approved for Reporting


884) 1475/2010 Suit NANNEY KHAN (Plaintiff) V/S MUHAMMAD DAWOOD KHAN & OTHER (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Specific Performance of Contract ), Specific Performance
Tag Line:Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 24 & 172---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 117 & 120---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Requirements--- Ownerless property---Execution of document---Onus to prove---Plaintiff claimed to have entered into agreement to sell with defendant for suit property---Validity---In order to succeed in a Court of law for specific performance of agreement, plaintiff had to prove execution of agreement through a strong, consistent and cogent evidence independently and he could not succeed in obtaining decree solely on the basis of weakness, lacuna and total absence in or of the defence---Court, in the present case, was satisfied that none was known to the Court for having any right or entitlement in suit property, in such situation the Court was required to find out the actual owner/or his/her legal heirs before holding that suit property was escheatable---High Court imposed cost upon the plaintiff who had been in illegal possession of suit property since year, 2009---Suit was dismissed, in circumstances.
Citation:2015 YLR 1652
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 20-JAN-15
Approved for Reporting


885) 2552/2014 Suit Jubilee General Ins. Co. Ltd., & another. (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Assistant Director, Directorate of Intelligence & Investigation, Islamabad has no jurisdiction to issue any notice to a tax payer, who is not registered either with LTU or RTO Islamabad in terms of SRO 350(I)/2014 dated 7.5.2014.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 12-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


886) 6439/2019 Const. P. Javeria (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:(a) The repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was by virtue of Article 89(2)(a)(ii) of the Constitution, i.e., by a resolution of the Senate disapproving the same and not by way of any repealing enactment. Therefore, the effect of repeal contained in sections 6, 6-A and section 24 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which otherwise apply only when a repeal is by way of a repealing enactment, were neither triggered nor would those serve as an aid in construing the effect of repeal under a Constitutional provision such as Article 89. In other words, on the repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 by the effect of Article 89 of the Constitution, nothing contained in the General Clauses Act, 1897 would come to save the Amending Admission Regulations that had been made under the repealed Ordinance. In view of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council v. Muhammad Fahad Malik (supra), Article 264 of the Constitution also did not have the effect of saving or giving permanency to the Amended Admission Regulations when the effect of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was only temporary as it was never accorded approval by the Parliament. Therefore, on 29-08-2019, when the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was repealed by the effect of Article 89 of the Constitution, the Amended Admission Regulations also stood repealed and the Original Admission Regulations were revived. (b) It will be seen that while the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 50 of the PMC Ordinance, 2019 repeals all previous Regulations, but that is subject to sub-section (7) which provides that the previous Regulations will continue to apply to the on-going admission process. The repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 1962 by the PMC Ordinance, 2019, the former being a permanent statute under the 1973 Constitution, is not a repeal by virtue of Article 89 of the Constitution, but a repeal by a repealing statute, albeit a temporary one, and one which has been expressly made subject to section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which in turn provides that ???the repeal shall not revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect???. We have already discussed above that on 29-08-2019 the Amended Admission Regulations had ceased and the Original Admission Regulations had revived. Therefore, when sub-section (7) of section 50 of the PMC Ordinance, 2019 provides that the previous Regulations will continue to apply to the on-going admission process, those can only be the Original Admission Regulations.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 14-NOV-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4396/2019 Pakistan Medical and Dental Council thr. its Secretary, Islamabad v. Javeria & others,C.A.611/2020 Pakistan Medical and Dental Council now Pakistan Medical Commission thr. its Secretary, Islamabad v. Javeria & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Pending


887) 7380/2018 Const. P. Karamuddin Panhyar (Petitioner) V/S The NAB (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
We have decided the main appeal of the appellant therefore the Constitution Petition No: 7380 of 2018 filed by the appellant for suspension of his sentence during the pendency of the appeal has become infructuous and is also dismissed.
Hon'be Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 01-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


888) 1684/2012 Const. P. Matloob Ahmed Khan and others (Petitioner) V/S Chairman NAB and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 11-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


889) 2068/2016 Const. P. Gulistan Textiles Mills Limited (Petitioner) V/S VIIIth ADJ Karachi South & Another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 8 (Fair Rent))
Tag Line:- Similarly, a presumptive view in respect of overall inflation and rate of taxes cannot be applied. The maintenance claimed to have been made/done by the landlord/respondent and in support thereof they have filed some accounts and debit vouchers but it pertains to a period w.e.f. March 2007onward. How these debit vouchers and maintenance bills are being applied to entire building and on what calculation and basis its ratio in terms of facilities provided to the premises is being applied, is inconceivable on the strength of the evidence available on record. Floor-wise true calculation is not provided. The presumptive analysis thus is beyond the domain and jurisdiction of the Rent Controller. The statistics in terms of inflation and maintenance charges should have been provided in statement recorded on oath and only then it could have been taken into consideration by the appellate Court. Filing plethora of documents disclosing them as debit vouchers in respect of maintaining the entire building is inconceivable. Statistics showing percentage of taxation over the building in question as well as maintenance as to be applied to entire building and has to be established statistically and not generally. Such data was not provided to Rent Controller. Taxation and maintenance are differently applied on ground floor and upper floors. - Similarly in presence of lease deeds of the same building between same landlord and tenant or between same landlord and other tenants, the reliance/applicability of rent or fair rent of other buildings in the adjoining locality should not have been applied as a priority, wherein respect of which direct evidence is available. When a building is operated by lifts there is not a serious degree of difference between second and third floor of the same building where premises are situated. - Though the Rent Controller while determining fair rent of the premises in question has taken a very conservative view by fixing fair rent at Rs.10/-per sq. foot, yet I am of the view that fair rent fixed by the appellate Court is on higher side. The Rent Controller and appellate Court were required to provide a cumulative effect of all those factors available under section 8 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 subject to availability of evidence though the quantum of inflation and the enhancement of taxation has not been statistically provided in terms of applicability of such claim/charges per sq. foot yet the other factors may contribute for the determination of fair rent. - The rise in cost of construction has also not been demonstrated statistically. It is only presumptive analysis that cost of construction rises with the passage of time, however, the witness is required to provide data of such rise in cost of construction through his affidavit or any expert witness. It is a difficult assignment but the requirement of law. This burden could be relieved had appropriate lease deeds of same building or of adjoining building having similar facilities could be cited in evidence. - Section 8(2) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 enables the Rent Controller to revise such fair rent on account of changes/ additions brought or improving the premises in question which is not the case here. Similarly, there cannot be an automatic enhancement at the rate of 10% per annum on the fair rent in terms of Section 9 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. It provides a maximum cap of 10% per annum on the existing fair rent and not an automatic enhancement to its maximum. Such enhancement at any particular rate, which in any case should not be 10% per annum, is dependent on certain factors which were not decided in the application under section 8 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. Besides, there was no prayer for such enhancement under section 9 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 25-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1490-K/2021 Gulistan Textile Mills Limited v. The Learned VIIIth Addl.District Judge, South at Karachi. & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


890) 154/2019 Criminal Miscelleneous MRS. FARHEEN W/O AURANGZEB MUHAMMAD KHAN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE & ANOTHER (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:1. The ratio of the said judgments of the Supreme Court is that where the remedy under section 249-A Cr.P.C. is available before the trial Court, the High Court should not exercise inherent jurisdiction under section 561-A Cr.P.C except in extraordinary circumstances which warrant such an action. In other words, the question is not to the jurisdiction of the High Court, but the manner in which such jurisdiction is to be regulated by the High Court. Ref. Muhammad Farooq v. Ahmed Nawaz Jagirani (PLD 2016 SC 55); Maqbool Rehman v. State (2002 SCMR 1076); Bashir Ahmed v. Zafar-ul-Islam (PLD 2004 SC 298); Mian Munir Ahmad v. State (1985 SCMR 257). 2. It is a misconception to state that in all cases where it is being contended that a civil dispute has been converted into a criminal case, an applicant need not approach the trial Court under section 249-A Cr.P.C. or 265-K Cr.P.C. 3. The argument that section 249-A Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked until a formal charge is framed under section 242 Cr.P.C., is misconceived. Section 249-A Cr.P.C. categorically states that the power thereunder can be exercised ???at any stage of the case???. Rel. State v. Ashiq Ali Bhutto, 1993 SCMR 523.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 18-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


891) 36/2001 Execution M/S. HABIB BANK LIMITED (Decree Holder) V/S M/S. NATIONAL FIBRES LIMITED (Judgment Debtor)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 17-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


892) 8408/2018 Const. P. Nazir Ahmed Soomro (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 17-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.133-K/2019 Nazir Ahmed Soomro v. Federation of Pakistan and others,C.A.71-K/2020 Nazir Ahmed Soomro v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Converted into Appeal and Allowed,Disposed


893) 204/2017 Cr.Misc. DR. EHSAN BARI S/O SHEIKH MUHAMMAD DIN & ANOTHER (Applicant) V/S WASEEM MAQSOOD & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 25-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


894) 3169/2019 Const. P. Fouzia Khan (Petitioner) V/S Chairman / CEO PIA and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aziz-ur-Rehman, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 08-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


895) 154/2008 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Collector of Customs (Applicant) V/S China National Water Resourcess Hydropower Eng. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 03-NOV-09
Approved for Reporting


896) 114/2011 I. A Muhammad Ismail (Appellant) V/S Dubai Islamic Bank Limited (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2016 CLD 5
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 15-DEC-14
Approved for Reporting


897) 424/2020 Cr.Bail Wajid Pahore (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Tag Line:Post Arrest Bail
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 08-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


898) 507/2019 Const. P. D.U.H.S & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others\ (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 MLD 357
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 07-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


899) 891/2019 Const. P. M/s United Business Machines thr Muhammad Aslam (Petitioner) V/S Ghulam Hussain Hidayatullah & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 15 )
Tag Line: -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)
Order Date: 25-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1108-K/2021 M/s. United Business Machines v. Ghulam Hussain Hidayatullah & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


900) 182/2017 Cr.Misc. Ch. Azeem Ahmed (Applicant) V/S S.H.O P.S Sanjar Chang District Tando Allahyar & 17 others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 01-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


901) 235/2009 H.C.A Hameed A.Haroon (Appellant) V/S Yousuf A.Haroon & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 PLD Sindh 507
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 17-FEB-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.894/2020 Muhammad Hanif & another v. Hameed A. Haroon & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


902) 6026/2018 Const. P. Shoukat Hussain Jokhio (Petitioner) V/S The Stae thr Chairman NAB & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Lastly, we may observe that while deciding bail petitions an elaborate sifting of evidence cannot be made but the only tentative assessment is required, and a cursory glance of the record show that all the petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connivance with each other have caused huge loss to the Government exchequer, therefore, the pre-arrest bail of petitioners Sabah-ul-Islam, Muhammad Waseem, Roshan Ali Shaikh, Fazal-ur-Rehman, Ahmed Ali, Farrukh Jamal Siddiqui, Nadeem Qadir Khokhar and Sohail Yar Khan is recalled with imidiate effect, their petitions are dismissed.
Citation:2021 PCr.LJ 24
Hon'be Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 24-AUG-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.486-K/2020 Sabah-ul-Islam Khan & another v. The Chairman NAB Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Infructuous


903) 371/2019 Const. P. Asif Ali & others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh through Secretary Home Department & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Service matters (Son Quota (Dismissed))
Tag Line:In view of the above, it is crystal clear that the respondents cannot circumvent the law to make recruitment against son quota by issuing Standing Order for recruitment in Sindh Police against Shaheed Quota, Son Quota without approval of the Provincial Government
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


904) 730/2019 Const. P. Mst. Shakeela (Petitioner) V/S Mohammad Arif Abbasi & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


905) 2298/2018 Const. P. Raza Muhammad & others (Petitioner) V/S Secretary Home Department, Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 21-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.382-K/2019 Salman Tahir and others v. Secy: Home Deptt: Govt.of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


906) 4668/2015 Const. P. Lucky Cement Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Employee Old Age Benefits Act, 1976 (Payment of contribution under EOBI Act 1976)
Tag Line:Petitioner employers sought declaration that demand of contributions by the Federal EOBI under EOBI Act 1976 is illegal as EOBI became federal subject after 18th Amendment and subsequent Sindh EOBI Act 2014; Sindh Province did enact the Act 2014 but could not establish the Institution; CCI resolved EOBI shall remain with Federal Government. Held petitioners can???t take benefit of dispute between the Federation and Province; priority must be given to the employees as the Old Age Benefit law is a beneficial law, aimed for the benefit of the employees therefore in case contribution amount is not received by the EOBI ultimately it is the employees who will suffer. Hence these petitions are disposed of in terms that petitioners shall deposit the contributions and other dues according to EOBI Act 1976; all amount deposited with the Nazir shall be returned in favour of the EOBI established under the EOBI Act 1976.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 07-SEP-21
Approved for Reporting


907) 618/2012 Const. P. Muhammad Akram Khan (Petitioner) V/S Abrar Ahmed and Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2012 CLC 1621, 2012 SBLR 1476
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Justice Mr. Justice Maqbool Baqar
Order Date: 26-JUN-12
Approved for Reporting


908) 273/2013 Cr.J.A MUHAMMAD ALI S/O YAMEEN KHAN (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 PCr.LJ Note 13
Hon'be Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 10-APR-20
Approved for Reporting


909) 111/2013 Cr.Misc. Mst.Saeeda Shaikh (Applicant) V/S The SSP Larkana and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah
Order Date: 03-JUN-13
Approved for Reporting


910) 223/2008 H.C.A Abdul Rasheed & Ors. (Appellant) V/S Abdul Ghani & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Athar Saeed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 13-JUN-11
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.764-K/2011 Abdul Ghani (decd) thr. his L.Rs. & others v. Abdul Rashid (decd) his L.Rs. and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed


911) 1642/2016 Const. P. Muhammad Ashraf and another (Petitioner) V/S Faisal Cantonment Board and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 08-FEB-17
Approved for Reporting


912) 723/2011 Const. P. Asghar Khan & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Prov of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 CLC 1534
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Rasool Memon
Order Date: 12-MAY-14
Approved for Reporting


913) 4685/2020 Const. P. Azhar Hussain Solangi and Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 21-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


914) 4917/2021 Const. P. Penta International (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Tabulation of redemption fine.
Advocates:Muhabbat Hussain Awan(ADVO-13542-SBC-KHI),Muhammad Mustafa(ADVO-16160-SBC-KHE),Dy Attorney General(DAG),Zain ul Abdin Jatoi(ADVO-6347-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 08-SEP-21
Approved for Reporting


915) 5890/2018 Const. P. Ashiq Hussain Chaudhary & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Cantonments Act 1924 (section 117), Cantonments Act 1924, Cantonments Act 1924 (section 179), Cantonments Act 1924 (section 181), Cantonments Act 1924 (section 108), Cantonments Act 1924 (section 116)
Tag Line: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.
Citation:2021 CLC 1437
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain
Order Date: 02-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail: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 Status:Pending


916) 3668/2020 Const. P. Dadan Khan Pirzado and Others (Petitioner) V/S The Sect: Education and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:withdrawal of promotion
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 16-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


917) 295/2020 Cr.Misc. Mst. Fouzia @ Waziran (Applicant) V/S SSP District Jamshoro & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 28-AUG-20
Approved for Reporting


918) 1011/2013 Const. P. REHAN AHMED BIAG (Petitioner) V/S MST. SABEEN NAZ & OTHERS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 06-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


919) 616/2020 Cr.Bail Sabz Ali Badani Jatoi V/S (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Topic: Bail Matters, Bail Matters (Bail After Arrest---497- Under S. 302 PPC)
Tag Line:Applicant seeks post arrest bail for offences punishable under section 302, 324, 148, 149, 114, 429, PPC. Complainant Mst. Khanzadi, stating therein that there is dispute between them and accused Ahmed Ali Jatoi. She took meals to them. At 1200 hours there came accused Ahmed Ali, Noor Hassan, Ali Hyder, Wahid Ali, Jumo having K.K rifles, Sabz Ali, Rasheed and 03 unknown persons having guns. On the instigation of Ahmed Ali, accused Ali Hyder fired at Qalandar Bux, accused Noor Hassan fired at Karim Dino and Sabz Ali fired at Akhtiar. Admittedly the name of the present applicant transpires in the FIR with specific role of causing gunshot injury upon P.W Akhtiar and in this unfortunate incident one person, namely, Qalandar Bux has lost his life and two persons received firearm injuries. All the eye witnesses including the injured witnesses supported the case in their statements under section 161 Cr.P.C. Bail and the same is dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 08-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


920) 6863/2019 Const. P. Taj Muhammad Ansari (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
the petitioner claims pensionary benefits from the Law department on account of his attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years--petitioner was appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor/Assistant Government Pleader on contract basis--In the light of Section 15 of the Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973 and Rule 8 of Efficiency & Discipline Rules, 1973, the petitioner is not entitled to the pensionary benefits as he was / is not qualified to retain the aforesaid post in public office due to his conviction in the criminal cases.
Topic: Service matters (Pension)
Tag Line:the petitioner claims pensionary benefits from the Law department on account of his attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years--petitioner was appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor/Assistant Government Pleader on contract basis--In the light of Section 15 of the Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973 and Rule 8 of Efficiency & Discipline Rules, 1973, the petitioner is not entitled to the pensionary benefits as he was / is not qualified to retain the aforesaid post in public office due to his conviction in the criminal cases.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 11-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


921) 220/2011 H.C.A Muhammad Farooque vs Aman Elahi (Appellant) V/S Aman elahi (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 14-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


922) 1650/2020 Const. P. Gas & Oil PakistanLtd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 PTD 104
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 29-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


923) 1847/2016 Suit M/s. EFU General Insurance Ltd (Plaintiff) V/S M/s. Emirates Airline / Emirates Sky Cargo & other (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Term an act of war or armed conflict as mentioned in Rule 18(2)(c) of the Fourth Schedule of Carriage by Air Act, 2012, also means non-international armed conflict (NIAC). Armed attack at Jinnah International Airport on 08.06.2014 falls within non-international armed conflict (NIAC) or at least it may be categorised as a hybrid phenomena; where repeated acts of terrorism in furtherance of defined objectives translated into a non-international armed conflict.
Topic: International Law
Tag Line:Term an act of war or armed conflict as mentioned in Rule 18(2)(c) of the Fourth Schedule of Carriage by Air Act, 2012, also means non-international armed conflict (NIAC). Armed attack at Jinnah International Airport on 08.06.2014 falls within non-international armed conflict (NIAC) or at least it may be categorised as a hybrid phenomena; where repeated acts of terrorism in furtherance of defined objectives translated into a non-international armed conflict.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 06-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting


924) 905/2015 Const. P. Miss. Erum & others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Service matters (Appointment)
Tag Line:Petitioner in pursuance advertisement applied for drawing teacher & Orientale teacher. They claimed on conducting the written test they declared successful candidate. they approached obtaining offer letter but could not. State council informed that since irregularities were found in the test no result of written test was announced .However, only offer letter issued them on contract basis which were canceled and not appointed. merely issuance of offer order is no ground to claim appointment order as the respondents had found something fishy in the matter and recommended for scrapping of the whole recruitment process. The material placed on record before this Court clearly shows that a policy decision was taken by the Government to have the recruitment undertaken for the posts by way of fresh advertisement. In the light of above facts and the observation made by the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Civil petition no 186K/2013 Muhammad Arif & others vs. Province of Sindh &others(supra), consequently, all the Constitution Petitions merit no consideration and are dismissed with no order as to cost.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.283-K/2019 Miss Erum and others v. Province of Sindh thr. Secy: Education & Literacy Department Govt. of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


925) 6008/2017 Const. P. M/s Hascol Petroleum Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 26-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.88-K/2021 Commissioner Inland Revenue v. M/s. Hascol Petroleum Limited & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


926) 41/2020 Criminal Appeal Zaheer s/o Haji Qasim Lakho (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 05-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


927) 1830/2016 Cr.Bail Imran (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 06-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting


928) 6462/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Najam (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:deceased quota
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 22-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


929) 286/2003 Suit SYED WAQAR HAIDER ZAIDI (Plaintiff) V/S MST.ALAM ARA (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 21-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


930) 1559/2019 Const. P. Dr. Wahid Bux Chadhar & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 PLC (CS) 329
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 29-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


931) 5570/2018 Const. P. Muneem Khan & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Registrar Pakistan Nursing Council & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 15-NOV-18
Approved for Reporting


932) 43/2016 Cr.J.A Sadique Ali Sabzoi (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Tag Line:Against Order of Trial Court (Death Sentence)
Hon'be Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 18-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


933) 21/2012 Judicial Companies Misc. King?s Food (Pvt.) Ltd. and Hilal Confectionery (Pvt.) Ltd.a (Applicant) V/S Nonw (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar
Order Date: 07-MAR-14
Approved for Reporting


934) 47/2003 Civil Revision Khalid Hussain thr:LRs (Applicant) V/S Province of Sindh and other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC
Tag Line:Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XLI, R. 31---Suit for declaration without seeking possession---Main-tainability---Gift---Proof of---Contention of defendants was that no valid and legal gift was made in favour of plaintiff---Suit was dismissed concurrently---Validity---No attesting witness of gift was produced by the donee---Nothing was on record with regard to possession of plaintiff on the suit property---Plaintiff had failed to prove the execution of gift in her favour---Suit for declaration without seeking possession was not maintainable---Both the courts below had decided the matter by referring evidence on record---Case should not be remanded when there was sufficient material available to examine the issues to settle the dispute between the parties---Sufficient compliance had been made of the requirements of O. XLI, R. 31, C.P.C.---No effort was made to claim possession pending the appeal before the Appellate Court---Revision could be dismissed on account of failure of plaintiff to seek possession along with declaration of ownership in circumstances---Revision was dismissed in circumstances. National Bank of Pakistan v. Mst. Hajra Bai and 2 others PLD 1985 Kar. 431; Muhammad Subhan and another v. Mst. Bilquis Begum through Legal Heirs PLD 1994 Kar. 106; Messrs National Bottlers (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Additional Secretary, Federation of Pakistan and 2 others 1995 CLC 631; Auqaf Department v. Javed Shuja and others 1995 CLC 1173; Rashid Ahmed and others v. Sardar Bibi and others 1994 MLD 467; Nasrullah Khan v. Rasul Bibi 2001 SCMR 1156; Kanwal Nain and 3 others v. Fateh Khan and others PLD 1983 SC 53; Jam Pari v. Muhammad Abdullah 1992 SCMR 786; Haji Muhammad Din v. Malik Muhammad Abdullah PLD 1994 SC 291; Abdul Hakeem v. Habibullah and 11 others 1997 SCMR 1139 and Anwar Zaman and 5 others v. Bahadur Sher and others 2000 SCMR 431 ref. Nasir Abbas v. Mansoor Haider Shah PLD 1989 SC 568; Syed Iftikhar-ud-Din Haider Gardezi and 9 others v. Central Bank of India, Ltd., and 2 others 1996 SCMR 669; Abdur Razzaq v. Sabar Khan 2004 CLC 950; Sultan Muhammad and another v. Muhammad Qasim and others 2010 SCMR 1630; Sarfraz Khan v. Federation of Pakistan 1986 SCMR 1950; Niaz Ahmed Khan v. Kishwar Begum and 19 others PLD 2003 Lah. 48; Haji Ghulam Rasool and others v. The Chief Administrator of Auqaf, West Pakistan PLD 1971 SC 376; Amanat Ali v. Abdul Haque and 27 others 1999 MLD 1148; Muhammad Yousaf and 3 others v. Mst. Zubeda Begum and another 1993 MLD 2138; Mir Zaman v. Mst. Begum Jan and 11 others PLD 1983 Pesh. 100; Mian Tahir Shah and another v. Additional District Judge, Swabi and others 1998 SCMR 858; Muhammad Yousaf v. Abdul Majid PLD 1993 Lah. 245; Haji Jan Muhammad v. Provincial Water Board, Balochistan, Quetta PLD 1994 SC 242 and Allah Bakhsh and another v. Ghulam Janat and 6 others PLD 1993 Lah. 254 distinguished.
Citation:2016 YLR 1370
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 11-SEP-15
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.3-K/2016 Khalid Hussain through his L.Rs. v. Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


935) 1940/2014 Const. P. Prof: Jan Muhammad Memon (Petitioner) V/S Governor of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 16-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.2715/2018 Professor Jan Muhammad Memon v. The Governor of Sindh/Chancellor thr. the Principal Secretary, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Infructuous


936) 7687/2017 Const. P. AssetLink Asia (Pvt) Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2020 CLC 410
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


937) 787/2019 Criminal Appeal Akhtar Meen S/o Khayal Jan (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Advocates:Aftab Ahmed(ADVO-4091-SBC-KHI),Prosecutor General Sindh(PGS)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 18-DEC-20
Approved for Reporting


938) 401/2011 Cr.Bail Muhammad Arshad & another (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 04-JUN-11
Approved for Reporting


939) 3373/2016 Const. P. Abrar Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:proforma promotion
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 12-FEB-21
Approved for Reporting


940) 7122/2018 Const. P. Zamir Hussain Ujjan (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Without touching the merits of the cases and by consent the competent authority of the respondent-department is directed to place the cases of petitioners for consideration of their regularization under Section 3 of Sindh (Regularization of Ad-hoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013, before the relevant Committee constituted by the Government of Sindh.
Topic: Service matters (Section 3 of Sindh Regularization Act, )
Tag Line:Without touching the merits of the cases and by consent the competent authority of the respondent-department is directed to place the cases of petitioners for consideration of their regularization under Section 3 of Sindh (Regularization of Ad-hoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013, before the relevant Committee constituted by the Government of Sindh.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-MAR-20
Approved for Reporting


941) 621/2017 Suit Mir Jeeand Badini. (Plaintiff) V/S Model Collectorate of Custom Appraisement & Ors. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Injunciton Dismissed)
Tag Line:Import-ability of Dump Trucks after amendment in Import Policy decided in this case
Citation:2020 PTD 213
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 05-JUL-19
Approved for Reporting


942) 3/2019 Suit Amsons Textile Mills (Pvt) Limited (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:res judicata in suit after decision in constitution petition.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 05-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


943) 2201/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Asif Ansari and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Televison Corp. and ORs (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:the foremost questions involved in the present proceedings are whether the re-designation / induction of the private respondents as Producer Programs (G-5) was/is suffering from inherent disqualification under the PTVC rules, and whether the private respondents are holders of the public office, therefore, fall within the purview of sub-clause 1(b) (ii) of Article 199 of the Constitution and this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this petition?
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1075-K/2021 Muhammad Asif Ansari & another v. Pakistan Television Corporation through its Managing Director & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


944) 3912/2018 Const. P. Afaquddin Marwat (Petitioner) V/S NAB and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 03-DEC-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.699/2019 Afaquddin Marwat v. National Accountability Bureau (NAB) thr. its Chairman, Islamabad & another Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed


945) 6604/2020 Const. P. Nasim Ahmed Memon (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:the petitioner is an educationist and has been serving in the Public Education Sector in Sindh since 1987. Per learned counsel the Universities and Boards Department, the Government of Sindh, Karachi invited application for the position of ???Chairman-Board??? and petitioner was one of the candidates for the aforesaid post--
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 13-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


946) 45/2019 J.M Al-Habib Coop: Housing Society Ltd (Applicant) V/S Mrs. Shamim Barlas & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Where the plaintiff/applicant establishes fraud, the defendant benefitting from the fraud and opposing the application of section 18, Limitation Act, must show that the plaintiff had clear and definite prior knowledge of the facts constituting the particular fraud and not merely clues or hints of the fraud, failing which limitation will run only from the date of actual knowledge of the fraud.
Citation:2021 YLR 141
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 05-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting


947) 333/2012 Suit M/s. FGBC Limited & Another (Plaintiff) V/S Director General Mines and Minerals Development & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Citation:2019 CLC 267, 2018 SBLR 1812
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 21-JUN-18
Approved for Reporting


948) 1486/2014 Const. P. Messrs Pakistan Petroleum Limited (Petitioner) V/S Arif Aziz & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Back benefits)
Citation:2017 PLC Lab. 122
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-JAN-17
Approved for Reporting


949) 2839/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Azeem (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and otehrs (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line: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
Order Date: 19-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


950) 28/2016 Cr.Appeal Juman son of Aloo (Appellant) V/S the State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Ashraf Jehan
Order Date: 30-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


951) 65/2016 F.R.A Muhammad Aamir Malik (Appellant) V/S Mrs. Afshan Ateeq & Another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2018 SBLR Sindh 1913
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 20-APR-18
Approved for Reporting


952) 518/2013 Const. P. Amir Aslam Shaikh & ohters (Petitioner) V/S COurt of IV th Rent Controller & ohters (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:the jurisdiction vested in it was not exercised fairly justly and in fact the findings of the learned Rent Controller has completely shut down the plea raised by the petitioners/tenants wherein it is alleged by tenants that in terms of section 18 the default claimed is to be regulated by section 15 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 and despite the fact that 30 days period was provided under section 18 to tender the rent, the tenants/petitioners can still avail the rights guaranteed to them in terms of proviso to section 15 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, provided that they have fulfilled the conditions laid down therein. The judgments relied upon by learned counsel for respondent No.3 are not relevant to the present case. They relate to the issue of interlocutory orders regarding which no appeal lies, however, in the instant case issue is totally different wherein the learned Rent Controller has not performed and exercised the jurisdiction, as required.
Citation:2014 SBLR Sindh 495
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui
Order Date: 11-JUL-13
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.200-K/2013 Muhammad Nadeem v. Aamir Aslam Shaikh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


953) 766/2018 Cr.Misc. Khalid Hussain & others (Applicant) V/S Asif Iqbal & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2021 PCr.LJ 242
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 08-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


954) 631/2010 Const. P. Shamim Begum (Petitioner) V/S Azizul Hasan Khan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Rent Matters)
Tag Line:Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----Ss. 15 & 18---Ejectment of tenant---Change of ownership---Denial of relationship of landlord and tenant by the tenant---Default in payment of rent---Expression "or by such other mode" in S.18, Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979---Scope---Agreement of sale---Scope---Landlord purchased demised premises through sale agreement and requested the tenant for payment of rent to him---Tenant did not pay rent to the new owner---Eviction petition was moved for personal use and on the ground of default in payment of rent---Contention of tenant was that she had purchased the demised premises from its previous owner through agreement of sale---Eviction petition was accepted concurrently---Validity---Previous Landlord had an agreement of sale and registered general power of attorney in his favour executed by the original owner---Landlord had even authority to sell and mortgage the demised premises on the basis of registered irrevocable general power of attorney---Tenant had only an agreement of sale the execution of which had been denied by the original owner---Tenant had not filed suit for specific performance of agreement to sell to get such denial declared false and got her title perfected through due process of law---Agreement to sell in favour of tenant had been disputed by the original owner of demised premises---Landlord had discharged his burden to prove the relationship of landlord and tenant---Tenancy on service of notice under Section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 on the tenant was created by operation of law---Landlord was entitled to claim eviction of tenant on the ground of default as well as personal need---Use of phrase "or any other mode" in Section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 in favour of new owner did cover transfer of property by registered irrevocable power of attorney duly registered with Registrar of property when such power was coupled with sale agreement showing consideration---When tenant had claimed ownership on the basis of mere sale agreement and he/she had failed to establish the same then default stood proved in favour of landlord---Tenant was directed to vacate the demised premises within thirty days---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. Rahmatullah vs. Ali Muhammad and another 1983 SCMR 1064 and Iqbal and 6 others v. Mst. Rabia Bibi and another PLD 1991 SC 242 distinguished.
Citation:2019 CLC 1557
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 08-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.213-K/2019 Shamim Begum v. Aziz-ul-Hassan Khan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed as Withdrawn


955) 2/2021 Const. P. Salman Bari S/o Abdul Bari (Petitioner) V/S Samia Khan and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Under Article 199 of Constitution, Petitioner seeks recall of order dated 01.12.2020, whereby non-bailable warrants (NBWs) was issued against the petitioner-- Section 51, CPC-- In the present case, the petitioner has specifically, pleaded that he had already paid a partial payment of Rs.2,71,000/- (Rupees Two Lac and Seventy-One Thousand) to the private respondent vide statement dated 10.11.2020 (available at page 73 of memo of petition) and undertake to pay the remaining amount within a reasonable time as per his financial position-- In the light of the aforesaid legal position of the case and an undertaking of the petitioner, the operation of NBWs issued against him by the learned trial Court is converted into BWs, enabling him to furnish security / appropriate bond equivalent to the remaining amount before the learned trial Court. However, the petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court on the next date of hearing and in case of failure, the order passed by the learned trial Court on 01.12.2020 shall be operative.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 04-JAN-21
Approved for Reporting


956) 1443/2016 Const. P. Najeeb ur Rehman Jakhrani. (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Ors. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 06-FEB-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.81-K/2018 Mir Najeeb-ur-Rehman Jakhrani v. The Province of Sindh and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


957) 1546/2007 Suit Trustees of the Port of Karachi (Plaintiff) V/S Syed Fazal Mahmood Shah (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 25-JAN-18
Approved for Reporting


958) 12/2020 I. A Abdul Ghaffar (Appellant) V/S Muhammad Aalam & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 07-SEP-20
Approved for Reporting


959) 127/2009 H.C.A Federation of Pakistan & another (Appellant) V/S Naya Daur Motors (Pvt) Limited (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2014 PLD 312
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 23-JAN-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.121-K/2014 Collector of Customs v. M/s Naya Daur Motor Pvt. Ltd. and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


960) 1740/2010 Suit MUHAMMAD ALI ABBAS (Plaintiff) V/S SYED HASSAN RAZA RIZVI (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Administration
Tag Line:Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VII, R. 11, O. II, R. 2, O. IX, R. 9 & O. XX, Rr.13 & 18---Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925), S.372---Administration suit---Limitation---Fresh suit on same cause of action---Rejection of plaint---Scope---Earlier suit for partition of same property was dismissed for non-prosecution wherein plaintiff was party---Plaintiff should have continued said suit in which claim was identical to the present one---Second suit on same cause of action and subject-matter was hit by the provisions of O.II, R.2 & O.IX, R.9, C.P.C.---Plaintiff was required to seek restoration of his earlier suit within the prescribed time under O.IX, R.9, C.P.C.---Decree under O.XX, R.13, C.P.C. read with O.XX, R.18, C.P.C. in a suit for partition/administration had distinct features---Limitation had estopped once the earlier suit for partition of estate of deceased was filed---Issue of inheritance could not be raised again and again between the same parties---Neither second suit for partition of estate of deceased nor second succession application under S.372 of Succession Act, 1925 could be filed---Plaintiff was not legal heir of the deceased as his mother who was alive at the time of opening of succession had excluded him from the legacy to claim share in the estate---No suit for administration of estate could be filed by someone who was not amongst the legal heirs of deceased at the time of opening of succession to claim anything by way of inheritance---Present suit for administration of estate of grandfather should be dismissed as grandson was not entitled to claim in the estate of grandfather---Mother of plaintiff had died after the death of her both parents and plaintiff had not claimed inheritance on the basis of son of pre-deceased daughter---Plaintiff could not claim anything from the estate of deceased in circumstances---Plaint was rejected accordingly. Muhammad Zahid through Legal Heirs v. Mst. Ghazala Zakir and 7 others PLD 2001 Kar. 83 ref. Aziz Ahmad and others v. Mst. Hajran Bibi and another 1987 SCMR 527; Mst. Khatoon and 3 others v. Siddiq Muhammad and another 1981 CLC 409 Md. Bazlur Rahman v. Syed Ali Pramanik PLD 1967 Dacca 809 rel.
Citation:2014 CLC 1006
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 28-FEB-14
Approved for Reporting


961) 4/2018 Adm. Suit SELAT MARINE SERVICES CO. LLC (Plaintiff) V/S M.V. BOFORS & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Admiralty (Attachment before Judgment in Admiralty law)
Tag Line:Admiralty Jurisdiction - Mode of action in Rem and in personam - Arrrest of Ship and Sister ship - what is an "offending ship" - Arrest of Vessel under Rule 731 of Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S) read with Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC.
Citation:2019 PLD Sindh 533
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 29-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


962) 1635/2018 Cr.Bail AMIR S/O MIR ZAMAN (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 07-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


963) 2186/2021 Const. P. Zabardast Khan Mehar (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:NAB Petition for Reduction of Surety Amount
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 05-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


964) 2458/2018 Suit Khawaja Ahad Rahman & others. (Plaintiff) V/S Province of Sindh & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed(Author)
Order Date: 11-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting


965) 539/2000 Adm. Suit Al-Riaz (Pvt.) Limited and another (Plaintiff) V/S Muhammad Ismail and others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 14-JUL-17
Approved for Reporting


966) 143/2013 Const. P. Syed Abbas Raza (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 31-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4960/2018 Federation of Pakistan thr. Secretary Establishment Division, Islamabad v. Syed Abbas Raza & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted.to be fixed after 3 months


967) 24/1997 Cr.Acq.A. Lal Bux (Appellant) V/S Dhani Bux & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahid Anwar Bajwa
Order Date: 09-MAY-12
Approved for Reporting


968) 599/2009 I.T.R.A M/s. Karachi Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. (Applicant) V/S The Commissioner of Income Tax (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Faisal Arab, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Order Date: 14-DEC-11
Approved for Reporting


969) 1808/2017 Suit CPLC-Neighborhood Care & Others. (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 24-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


970) 324/2016 Const. P. Syed Ali Hyder Shah (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Citation:2017 SBLR Sindh 1787
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 01-JUL-17
Approved for Reporting


971) 363/2016 Const. P. Orangzeb Samo (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 15-MAR-18
Approved for Reporting


972) 98/2018 Cr.Bail Muhammad Moosa Pathan (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio(Author)
Order Date: 29-JUN-18
Approved for Reporting


973) 260/2019 H.C.A Mrs. Zarina Iqbal (Appellant) V/S Haji Jaffar & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 16-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


974) 12/2012 Conf.Case The State (Applicant) V/S Rashid Aslam & Arshad Nabi (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ghulam Qadir Leghari, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Order Date: 25-MAY-16
Approved for Reporting


975) 664/2008 Suit MRS. SAKINA SULEMAN (Plaintiff) V/S MUHAMMAD ARIF JANJUA (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-21
Approved for Reporting


976) 4300/2017 Const. P. KMC (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi(Author)
Order Date: 09-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting


977) 5871/2014 Const. P. Allama Mousa and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 23-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.880-K/2018 M/s Sui Southern Gas Company Limited and another v. Allana Mousa and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


978) 1111/2017 Const. P. Saif-uz-Zaman Khan (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010 (Petition dismiss)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yousuf Ali Sayeed
Order Date: 28-MAR-17
Approved for Reporting


979) 869/2019 Const. P. Nadir Ali (Petitioner) V/S M.D STEVTA and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Prima-facie the Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013 does not apply to the facts and circumstances of the present case of the petitioners, as the aforesaid Act of 2013 is relevant for those employees, who held the posts in Government of Sindh Departments which includes the post in a Project of such Department in connection with the affairs of the Province also excluding the employees appointed on contingent / daily wages basis and under the aforesaid Act 2013 the contingent service of the petitioners cannot be converted into regular service.
Tag Line:Prima-facie the Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013 does not apply to the facts and circumstances of the present case of the petitioners, as the aforesaid Act of 2013 is relevant for those employees, who held the posts in Government of Sindh Departments which includes the post in a Project of such Department in connection with the affairs of the Province also excluding the employees appointed on contingent / daily wages basis and under the aforesaid Act 2013 the contingent service of the petitioners cannot be converted into regular service.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 14-OCT-20
Approved for Reporting


980) 450/2014 Const. P. Aqeel Karim Dhedhi (Petitioner) V/S National Accountability Bureau (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ghulam Sarwar Korai
Order Date: 14-FEB-14
Approved for Reporting


981) 19/2014 F.R.A SHAM KUMAR S/O HUND RAJ (Appellant) V/S ULFAT SHAHEEN & ANOTHER (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----S. 17---Ejectment of tenant---Denial of relationship of landlord and tenant by the tenant---Default in payment of rent---Effect---Rent Controller accepted ejectment petition and directed the tenant to vacate the demised premises---Validity---Tenant had admitted that he had paid rent to the husband of landlady---Relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties---Tenant had not denied the ownership of landlady and he had entered in the demised premises as tenant---Tenant had committed default in payment of rent in the present case---Tenant had neither sent rent to the landlady or her husband through money order nor deposited the same in the Court---Tenant was directed to pay the defaulted rent and vacate the demised premises within fifteen days---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Messrs MFMY Industries v. Federation of Pakistan 2015 SCMR 1550 rel.
Citation:2020 CLC Note 51
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)
Order Date: 10-JUN-20
Approved for Reporting


982) 733/2003 Suit COL. (RETD) MUHAMMAD SHARIF (Plaintiff) V/S SQ. LDR. NOW LT. COL. (RETD) GHULAM FARI (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 29-MAY-20
Approved for Reporting


983) 1106/2011 Const. P. Usman & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Safia Bai & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author)
Order Date: 18-MAY-18
Approved for Reporting


984) 1307/2020 Const. P. Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Tag Line:We have examined the layout plan, drawings and Google map of the project available on record, wherein the actual path of the project and the bigger curve proposed by the University have been distinctly shown. It is clear from the above that if the impugned alignment is altered by including the bigger curve proposed by the University, the overall length of the project will be increased by several kilometers, and a portion of the said proposed bigger curve will pass through the oil and gas fields of OGDC. In such an event, the cost of the project and the time required for its completion will be increased substantially, and the said oil and gas fields will be exposed to the public / commuters and heavy construction machinery which may result into a disaster. Therefore, in addition to the legal position discussed above, prima facie, the proposal made by the University does not appear to be practical and safe for the commuters, public at large and the people working at the said oil and gas fields. In view of the object, purpose and urgent need of the project, it shall be in the public interest that the same is completed expeditiously. As a result of the above discussion, C.P. No.1307/2020 and all the applications pending therein are dismissed ; and C.P. No.05/2021 is disposed of by directing the Government and the acquiring agency to complete the project and the land acquisition proceedings in respect thereof expeditiously and strictly in terms of the Act. There will be no order as to costs in any of the subject petitions.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 07-JUL-21
Approved for Reporting


985) 792/2013 Const. P. Party-1 (Appellant) V/S Party-2 (Appellant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:contract employees
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 11-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


986) 1494/2008 Suit M/S.CENTURY INSURANCE CO.LTD (Plaintiff) V/S THE ASSITANT COLELCTOR (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Maintainability of suit to challenge an action taken without issuing the prescribed show-cause notice. Rate of Federal Excise Duty applicable to insurance services under section 10 of the Federal Excise Act, 2005 and the effect of Rule 40 of the Federal Excise Rules, 2005.
Tag Line:Maintainability of suit to challenge an action taken without issuing the prescribed show-cause notice. Rate of Federal Excise Duty applicable to insurance services under section 10 of the Federal Excise Act, 2005 and the effect of Rule 40 of the Federal Excise Rules, 2005.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 30-NOV-20
Approved for Reporting


987) 558/2018 Suit Abdul Majid & Others. (Plaintiff) V/S Mrs. Nida Irfan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 05-APR-18
Approved for Reporting


988) 3/2013 I. A Soofi Rice Mills & Others (Appellant) V/S N.B.P & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Citation:2019 CLD 395
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 26-SEP-18
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.4495/2018 Sofi Rice Mills, Larkana & others v. National Bank of Pakstan thr. its Manager Branch at Rato Dero, Larkana,C.A.318/2020 Sofi Rice Mills, Larkana & others v. National Bank of Pakstan thr. its Manager Branch at Rato Dero, Larkana Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Leave Granted,Pending


989) 1/2015 M.A. M/s. Alpha Insurance Company Ltd. (Appellant) V/S M/s. Poly Foils (Pvt.) Ltd and Another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan
Order Date: 28-DEC-16
Approved for Reporting


990) 700/2019 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Director DG I&I (Customs) (Applicant) V/S Aurangzaib & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Release of tampered / smuggled vehicle carrying smuggled items.
Citation:2021 PTD 1026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 24-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


991) 1830/2013 Const. P. Muhammad Ikhlaq and another (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 28-JAN-15
Approved for Reporting


992) 262/2017 H.C.A Gulshan Weaving Mills Limited (Appellant) V/S Al Baraka Bank (Pakistan) Limited & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 21-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1008/2018 Bank of Punjab, Karachi v. Gulshan Weaving Mills Ltd, Karachi & others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned


993) 185/2015 H.C.A Dr. Obaid ur Rehman & Others (Appellant) V/S Mrs. Neelofer Khalid & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)
Order Date: 23-APR-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.31-K/2019 Mrs. Neelofer Khalid and others v. Dr.Obaid-ur-Rehman and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending Adjourned


994) 706/2019 Const. P. Tahir Khan (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 07-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


995) 872/2019 Cr.Bail Mirza Ali Adil Baig (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Citation:2020 PCr.LJ 780
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 03-OCT-19
Approved for Reporting


996) 147/2020 Const. P. M/s Sahib Din Logistics (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Challenge to a s.37 STA notice couched in quo warranto.
Citation:2021 PTD 1245
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 30-MAR-21
Approved for Reporting


997) 111/2018 I. A Muhammad Asif (Appellant) V/S M. C. B. Bank Limited & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 CLD 733
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 05-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


998) 3411/2017 Const. P. Civil Aviation Authority (Petitioner) V/S Fed of Pakistan & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 27-OCT-17
Approved for Reporting


999) 1407/2013 Const. P. Dr. Moiinuddin Shaikh (Petitioner) V/S Federal Secretary, Water and Power, Govt. of Pakistan (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 23-OCT-18
Approved for Reporting


1000) 526/2014 Const. P. profile not available in database as case pertains to Hyd (Petitioner) V/S profile not available in database (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar
Order Date: 24-JUL-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.204-K/2016 Federation of Pakistan and others v. M/s New Allied Electronics Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


1001) 182/2018 Cr.Misc. AQUIL USMAN DHADUK & ANOTHER (Applicant) V/S MUHAMMAD SALAM & ORS (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar(Author)
Order Date: 08-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


1002) 165/2017 H.C.A Imran Modi (Appellant) V/S Mizhar Uddin (Farooqui) & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 YLR 874
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 24-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


1003) 200/2019 Suit Agha Steel Industries Ltd. (Plaintiff) V/S Directorate of Intelligence & Investigation & Ors. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Tax matters (Conduct of raid u section 175 of I Tax Ord and u/s 38 of Sales Tax Act 1990)
Tag Line:Sales Tax Act & Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 - Power to search premises of a taxpayer under S. 38 of Sales Tax Act and Section 175 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 can only by permitted when "some proceedings" are already pending before the officer.
Citation:2019 PTD 2119
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author)
Order Date: 10-APR-19
Approved for Reporting


1004) 972/2005 Suit DR. HASAN FATIMA JAFERY & ORS (Appellant) V/S ROYAL SAUDI CONSULATE KARACHI & ANOTHER (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
With the passage of time, the principle governing immunity has undergone a change. National Courts in different jurisdictions, specially where there exists constitutional dispensation, have generally narrowed down the scope of immunity, whether constitutional, diplomatic or any other type of immunity. One of the reasons for adopting such view, while interpreting the law or clauses relating to immunity is that the concept of immunity is to be balanced with the accountability and those rights guaranteed as fundamental and human rights.
Topic: The State Immunity Ordinance, 1981, Diplomatic and Consular Privileges Act, 1972
Tag Line:With the passage of time, the principle governing immunity has undergone a change. National Courts in different jurisdictions, specially where there exists constitutional dispensation, have generally narrowed down the scope of immunity, whether constitutional, diplomatic or any other type of immunity. One of the reasons for adopting such view, while interpreting the law or clauses relating to immunity is that the concept of immunity is to be balanced with the accountability and those rights guaranteed as fundamental and human rights.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 18-DEC-19
Approved for Reporting


1005) 3073/2012 Const. P. Saleem Khokhar (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 11-FEB-20
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.190-K/2020 Peter Qadir v. Govt. of Sindh thr. Secy: Social Welfare & Women Development Department and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


1006) 421/2020 Cr.Bail SALEEM KHALID S/O KHALID ABDUL AZIZ (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2021 PCr.LJ 119
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Mobeen Lakho(Author)
Order Date: 09-APR-20
Approved for Reporting


1007) 147/2016 Cr.Rev MUHAMMAD KHALID S/O MUHAMMAD RASHEED ASLAM & ORS (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain(Author)
Order Date: 09-AUG-18
Approved for Reporting


1008) 424/2017 Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. Sindh Revenue Board (Applicant) V/S M/s Meesam Construction Company (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 20-NOV-17
Approved for Reporting


1009) 769/2017 Cr.Bail Ali Gohar & another (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan(Author)
Order Date: 11-FEB-19
Approved for Reporting


1010) 8/2011 Spl. Cus. Ref. A. Additional Collectof of Customs (Applicant) V/S K. S. Sulemanji Esmailji & Sons (Private) Limited (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 PTD 1276
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 22-DEC-14
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.A.799/2015 Additional Collector of Customs v. M/s K.S. Sulemanji Esmailji & Sons (Pvt) Ltd.,C.P.182-K/2015 Additional Collector of Customs v. M/s K.S. Sulemanji Esmailji & Sons (Pvt) Ltd. Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending ,Disposed Leave Granted


1011) 1480/2011 Const. P. Muhammad Saleh & Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan(Author)
Order Date: 12-SEP-17
Approved for Reporting


1012) 123/2019 Criminal Appeal SYED JUNAID ALI SHAH S/O FIDA HUSSAIN SHAH (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito(Author)
Order Date: 14-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


1013) 405/2007 I.T.R.A The Commissioner of Income Tax (Applicant) V/S M/s Shaista Estate (Pvt) Ltd (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Order Date: 08-DEC-09
Approved for Reporting


1014) 1396/2010 Suit AURANGZAIB QURESHI & OTHERS (Plaintiff) V/S THE CHAIRMAN P.I.A & OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author)
Order Date: 08-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


1015) 190/2018 Civil Revision Muhammad Bachal (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio(Author)
Order Date: 23-MAR-19
Approved for Reporting


1016) 2820/2014 Const. P. Syed Mansoor Ali (Petitioner) V/S Chairman NAB and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2016 PLD Sindh 41
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahnawaz Tariq, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 25-JUL-14
Approved for Reporting


1017) 910/2019 Const. P. Abdul Sami Memon & Others (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Issue of promotion of PSE-IV in Pakistan Steel Mill
Citation:2020 PLC Lab. 125
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 20-AUG-19
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.551-K/2019 Abdul Sami Memon and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


1018) 4778/2021 Const. P. Pakistan Mobile Communication (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Federal Excise Duty, CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973, Sindh Sales Tax on Services Act, 2011
Tag Line:The impugned enactment is for area which formed part of province i.e. Sindh hence for all intent and purposes Article 142(c) is significant. It emphasized Provincial Assembly to legislate with respect to any matters not enumerated in the Federal Legislative List. The impugned Act whereby Serial No.6A was introduced to the First Schedule forming part of Table-II is introduced through a Money Bill in terms of Article 73 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. No other Entry of Part I of the Federal Legislative List could then be taken into account as this was a money bill which is primarily covered from Entry No.43 to 53 as routed through Article 73 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The federation has already conceded and we are not required to deliberate on the point that for a tax to fall under the said Federal Legislative List it must be covered by Entries No.43 to 53. This, as claimed to be a sales tax/Federal Excise Duty, is apparently covered in terms of Entry 49 to the Fourth Schedule to the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Thus, the 18th Amendment excludes the Federation by virtue of the Entry 49 from the competence to legislate on the subject of services rendered in their province on account of SSTA, 2011 w.e.f. 01.07.2011. --It is neither in the competence of the federation to legislate after 18th Amendment nor it relates to federation to invoke Entry No.58 of the Fourth Schedule to the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Similarly, Entry No.59, as relied upon by the respondents??? counsel, that these matters are incidental or ancillary to any matters enumerated in this part, is also inconsequential as this cannot be invoked independently unless a reciprocal entry is found within the competence of federation. One may argue this Entry 59 may have a bridged with Article 151 but we have already discussed non-application of Article 151.
Advocates:Muhammad Makhdoom Ali Khan(ADVO-2885-SBC-KHI),Dy Attorney General(DAG),Hyder Ali Khan(ADVO-44631-PBC-LHR),Ameer Bakhsh Metlo(ADVO-13549-SBC-KHI)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 18-OCT-21
Approved for Reporting


1019) 221/2017 I. A Khurram Shehzad (Appellant) V/S United Bank Ltd. (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2019 CLD 1205
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 31-MAY-19
Approved for Reporting


1020) 276/2018 I.T.R.A DR. ZAFAR SAJJAD (Applicant) V/S THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal(Author)
Order Date: 19-APR-21
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:C.P.1281-K/2021 The Commissioner Inland Revenue (Legal) v. Dr.Zafar Sajjad Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Pending


1021) 1216/2018 Const. P. Mst. Farzana Javed (Petitioner) V/S Mst. Nighat Sultana & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Sind Rented Premises Act - Eviction---15
Tag Line:(a) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S.15---Eviction petition---Default in payment of rent---Personal bona fide need of landlady---Scope---Trial Court dismissed the petition holding that landlady had failed to prove her personal need of the rented premises---Trial Court did not decide the issue of default on the ground that it was not agitated by her counsel at the time of final arguments---Appellate Court allowed the appeal and directed the tenant to vacate the rented premises---Validity---Held; it could not be believed that the counsel who filed case for default then filed an application for tentative rent order and after obtaining certified copies of ledger of Nazir filed an application for striking off defense, had failed to agitate ground of default in final arguments---Trial Court was entrusted with the duty of doing justice between the parties, to decide each issue between them in accordance with law on merit on the basis of record and evidence irrespective of arguments by the counsel---In presence of record/evidence, unless the question of default was dropped in writing, Trial Court was not supposed to leave a crucial issue between the parties undecided merely for want of arguments---Findings of Trial Court on the issue of personal bona fide need of landlady were equally perverse and contrary to the record and evidence---Tenant neither in her written statement nor in her affidavit-in-evidence had alleged that two flats of the landlady were lying vacant in the same building, but the Trial Court had relied on such purported statement of tenant---High Court, while maintaining the order of Appellate Court, dismissed the constitutional petition with costs. (b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S.15---Eviction petition---Personal bona fide need of landlady---Choice of landlord---Even if more than one premises were available with the landlord and he/she chose to occupy for personal need a particular one, the tenant had no right to challenge such choice of the landlord. (c) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S.16---Defense, striking off---Scope---Striking off defense in the case was not a mere technicality---Refusal to strike off defense amounted to denying statutory right accrued to the landlord---Use of word "shall" in S. 16(2) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 left no room for the Rent Controller to form even 'a humble opinion' to deny a statutory right accrued to landlord.
Citation:2019 CLC 687
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 18-JUL-18
Approved for Reporting


1022) 46/2007 Cr.Rev Muhammad Haroon.. (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: Criminal Procedure Code
Tag Line:Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 497(5) & 561-A---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 489-F & 420---Bail, cancellation of---Condonation as to appearance of accused during pendency of application for cancellation of bail---Inherent powers of High Court---Scope---Pre-arrest bail granted to accused was conditionally confirmed by Court of Session on basis of compromise between the parties, subject to payment of the amount mentioned in the dishonoured cheque in monthly instalments---Accused failed to make payments, on which the complainant filed application for cancellation of bail---Accused, instead of appearing before the court, filed application for condonation of his appearance for an indefinite period on medical grounds, which was dismissed by the court---In the garb of impugned order the accused had challenged the maintainability of the cancellation application---Question of jurisdiction had to be first raised before the Court, which had granted the bail---Grounds which had not been taken by the accused before the trial court, could not be examined by the High Court in exercise of inherent powers under S. 561-A, Cr.P.C. to interfere with the proceedings of the court below, as the same would amount to usurpation of power of the lower court---Accused, in such circumstances, before violating the bail order, should have filed application before the same court for modification of said order or breach of any undertaking by the complainant---Accused was guilty of violating the undertaking given by him before the court below for obtaining order of confirmation of bail---Accused was, thus, playing with the courts by unilaterally claiming that the complainant had not withdrawn the case--- Accused without exhausting said remedy had directly invoked the inherent jurisdiction of High Court, to obtain relief which had not been prayed before the Court of first instance---Accused had avoided to explain his position before the court below by abusing the process of the High Court under the cover of present proceedings for about eleven months---High Court, holding that the accused was to be put on notice as to why bail before arrest granted by the court below should not be cancelled on ground of violating the terms thereof, directed the accused, pending cancellation application, to comply with initial order for payment of monthly instalments by depositing the arrears of instalments with the Nazir of the High Court---Application under S. 561-A, Cr.P.C. was disposed of accordingly.
Citation:2016 PCr.LJ 700
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 11-DEC-15
Approved for Reporting
Apex Court Detail:Crl.P.4-K/2016 The State v. Muhammad Haroon Before Supreme Court of Pakistan Status:Disposed Dismissed


1023) 1578/2021 Const. P. Muhammad Saqib (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:departmental proceedings initiated against him as contemplated under Section 3(b)(c) of the Efficiency and Discipline Rules, 1988--as to how this petition is maintainable against departmental proceedings initiated against him and the final order for dismissal from service served upon him, which action of the respondent-department ought to have been assailed before the learned Sindh Service Tribunal (SST) at Karachi.
Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)
Order Date: 05-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


1024) 2410/2021 Const. P. Abdul Basit (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:promotion issue
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 21-APR-21
Approved for Reporting


1025) 265/2020 Const. P. Muhammad Salman Khan Baloch (Adv) (Petitioner) V/S Syed Mustafa Kamal & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi

Tag Line:Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P. No.D-265 of 2020 (writ of quo warranto) filed by Mohammad Salman Khan Baloch against Syed Mustafa Kamal, Ex City Nazim (Mayor) of Karachi for his disqualification. The petition has been dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan
Order Date: 04-JUN-21
Approved for Reporting