ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.54 of 2018

__________________________________________________________________

Dated: Order with signature of Judge(s)

__________________________________________________________________

1. For order on CMA No.287/2018

2. For order on CMA No.288/2018

09.01.2018

Mr. Arshad Tayebaly advocate for the plaintiff.

_____________

1) Urgency granted.

2) Per learned counsel for the plaintiff, the plaintiff is running a hotel in the name of “Regent Plaza Hotel and Convention Center, Karachi”. Per learned counsel for the plaintiff, the defendant No.2 had issued a notice dated 29.12.2016 to the plaintiff available as annexure “F” at page-73 with memo of plaint, which was duly replied by the plaintiff on 06.01.2017. Relevant portion of the same is being reproduced hereunder:-

“We assure you that there is nothing objectionable, under the prevalent laws, in the construction of Regent Plaza Hotel & Convention Centre. Since your notice is silent about any erection/re-erection of any building under our control, we are unable to fully respond to your notice. However, we would appreciate your staff to visit and survey our Regent Plaza Hotel & Convention Centre at any mutually agreed time to satisfy any of their concerns. Upon their visit, your staff will be accompanied by our nominated engineer who shall be able to answer queries, if any, that your staff may have”.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff urged that after about a year on the same allegations another notice was issued by the defendant No.2 on 27.12.2017 enclosed as annexure “H” at page-81 with Memo of Plaint wherein also same grounds are raised as of letter dated 29.12.2016 of the defendant No.2. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that on 01.01.2018 the aforesaid letter of the defendant No.2 was replied and the relevant/required documents were also sent to the defendant. Per learned counsel for the plaintiff, the defendant No.2 again issued a letter dated 03.01.2018, which was received yesterday evening to the plaintiff. Per learned counsel for the plaintiff, NOCs mentioned in para-4 of the said letter, were duly provided to the defendant No.2 by the plaintiff therefore, said impugned letter is patently illegal, malafide and is sent in order to pressurize the plaintiff. Issue notice to the defendants and Additional Attorney General for Pakistan for 24.01.2018. Till next date of hearing, the operation of impugned letter/notice dated 03.01.2018 available as annexure “J” at page-137 with memo of plaint shall remain suspended and defendant No.2 is restrained to take any adverse/coercive action against the plaintiff pursuant to aforesaid letter/notice.

JUDGE