O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Crl. Bail Application No.1341 of 2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
Mr. Muhammad Hanif Kashmiri, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Shahzado Saleem, A.P.G.
- - - - - - -
It is interalia contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that in Crl. Bail Application No.689/2009 filed by the some applicant before this Court vide its order dated 03.07.2009 was pleased to disposed of the appeal with the direction to the prosecution to conclude the case within three months. According to the learned counsel the matter has not been concluded within such period and only one prosecution witness has so far been examined. According to the counsel the matter is being delayed, whereas no delay on the part of the applicant. Be that as it may. Let the notice be issued to the complainant for the next date of hearing through trial Court in case No.229/2007 in the Court of IInd Additional Session Judge, through regular mode including courier and pasting.
To come up on 01.03.2010 as suggested.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. No.S-711 of 2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
1. For order on CMA No.3225/09
2. For Katcha Peshi.
3. For hearing of CMA No.3226/09
22-02-2010:
Mr. Nasir Rizwan Khan, advocate for the petitioner alongwith petitioner.
Mr. Qamaruddin, Advocate for the respondent alongwith respondent.
-----------
Abdul Aziz, attorney of the respondent, states that as per instruction of his principal he can allow six months time to the petitioner to vacate the premises. Imran Qureshi, son and attorney of the plaintiff, who is present in Court states that he will vacate the entire premises within six months from the date of this order of this Court.
Under the circumstances, the petition is being disposed of with the direction to the petitioner that the peaceful vacant possession shall be handed over to the respondent or their authorized representative after the expiry of six months from the date of this order subject to regular deposit of the rent with the 3rd Rent Controller, District Central. It is further directed that if within the specified period, if such premises is not vacated the writ of possession may be issued without notice.
The petition is disposed of in the above terms alongwith listed applications.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. No.128 of 2008
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
FOR HEARING OF CMA NO.121/2009
22-02-2010:
Mr. Shamshad Ali Qureshi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Abdul Khaliq Junejo, Advocate for the respondent.
----------
Through the instant application the petitioner is seeking restoration of the case, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 04.12.2008. Today, learned counsel appearing for the respondent showing grace and has candidly not objected on such restoration.
Under the circumstances, the instant application is allowed and the petition is restored to its original position.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that since his client is not been allowed to meet the minor for about 2-1/2 years and seeks production of his miner child. Respondent is directed to produce the minor on the next date of hearing. Let the matter come up for hearing on 08.03.2010 at 11.00 a.m.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Crl. Appeal No.302 of 2006
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
None for the appellant.
Mr. Shehzado Saleem, A.P.G.
--------
It appears that notices have not been issued to the surety. According to the learned APG the Non-Bailable Warrant have been issued.
Office is directed to issue Non-Bailable Warrant against the Accused and notices may also be issued to the surety through all modes and to be served through DIG (Prosecution). Adjourned to 15.03.2010.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. No.S-146 of 2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES
22-02-2010:
Mr. Zafar Alam Khan, advocate for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
--------
It appears that despite service on the counsel of the respondent Mr.Maula Bukhsh Khoso, he is not attending the Court. Let the notices be repeated on the advocate as well as direct notice be issued to the respondent through regular mode including courier and pasting. If none appears on the next date the matter shall proceed with the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner and dispose of the same on the basis of available record.
To come up after two weeks.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Crl. Bail Application No.13 of 2010
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
Mr. Raja Riaz Ahmed, advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Shahzado Saleem, APG.
-------
Learned counsel for the applicant seeks time to file the English translation of the document, statement etc. and also place on record the medical report before the next date of hearing. Learned APG also seeks time to call I/O who may also summoned.
To come up on 08.03.2010 at 1.00 p.m. Notice may also be issued to the complainant through P.S. Shahrah-e-Faisal for the next date.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Crl. Bail Application No.1231 of 2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
Syed Lal Hussain, advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Shahzado Saleem, A.P.G.
-------
Learned counsel for the applicant wants to proceed with the case, however, the learned APG is pointed out that the crime is heinous one and it will be appropriate to issue notices to the complainant.
Office is directed to issue notices to the complainant on the address given in the FIR. The complainant may also be served through P.S. Khawaja Ajmer Nagri.
To come up on 01.03.2010 at 12.30 p.m.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
S.M.A. No.148 of 2008
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
Mr. Nadeem Ahmed, holding brief for Mr.Amir Raza, advocate for the petitioner.
--------
As per bailiff report it appears that the respondent Nos.1 & 2 could not be served on account of having been shifted from such place. Petitioner is directed to provide the current address of the respondent within a week. Petitioner is further directed to associate the bailiff for affecting the service on the unserved respondents.
To come up after two weeks.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Crl. Bail Application No.1369 of 2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
Mr. Muhammad Afzal Mashwani, advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Muhammad Rizwan Dodani, Standing Counsel.
------
Learned Standing Counsel points out that earlier similar application was dismissed for non-prosecution on in Crl. Bail Application No.1222/09 where-after Crl. Bail Application No.1025/09 was filed by the same applicant on 12.09.2009 in which one Mr. Zakir Hussain Khaskheli, Advocate is appearing.
It appears that on 21.12.2009 the instant Bail Application was filed on behalf of the same applicant by Mr. Muhammad Afzal Mashwani, who is present in Court. It is strange to know that in respect of the same applicant and the same FIR, there are two cases pending in the High Court. Office is directed to submit report in this regard and call the concerned official of the branch where such application was instituted.
To come up on 01.03.2010.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
II. Appeal No.22 of 2006
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
Mr. Iqbal Kazi, advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Khalid Javed, Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Mr. Irfanullah, holding brief for Mr. Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Advocate for the respondent No.3.
------
Through instant application the appellant seeks direction that the rent which is being deposited in the rent proceeding may be directed to deposit before the Nazir of this Court. To such request the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has seriously objected and he undertakes to file counter affidavit. He further states that since certain development had undergone in the rent proceeding, he would like to place on record the order passed in such proceeding.
Accordingly the matter is being adjourned to 15.03.2010 as suggested by the learned counsel for the parties. Counter Affidavit be filed before the next date of hearing with advance copy to the applicant.
Both the learned counsel point out that out of impugned judgment another appeal bearing No.51/2006 filed by the present respondent No.1 is also pending which may be directed to tag with the instant appeal.
Office is directed to tag the appeal No.51/2006 alongwith this appeal and the same may be fixed on the same date.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Civil II Appeal No.30 of 2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
None for the appellant.
Syed Sultan Ahmed, Advocate for the CDGK.
------
The matter was taken up in the earlier part of the day when no one is in attendance on behalf of the appellant. The matter was kept aside to be taken up after recess, the same is taken for hearing but no one is in attendance on behalf of the appellant nor any intimation has been received.
On 25.01.2010 no one was present on behalf of the appellant. Today, Syed Sultan Ahmed, learned counsel for CDGK is present and states that the appellant have no right or title over the subject property. For these reasons the appellant is not pursuing the matter. Be that as it may. Since no one is in attendance on behalf of the appellant inspite of caution on 25.01.2010, accordingly the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
JUDGE
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C. P. No.S-904/2003
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
22-02-2010:
Mr. Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Haji Abdul Majeed, Counsel for the State.
------
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner vide order dated 16.02.2007 the petition was final disposed of whereby the respondent No.1 were restrained from dispossession to the petitioner from the subject premises. It appears that there-after an application for review i.e. CMA 687/04 was filed by the respondent No.1 which was allowed on 16.04.2007 and now the matter is being re-heard.
Learned Counsel for the State requests for time as according to him this file is sent to him recently and he is not prepared with the case.
Adjourned to 15.03.2010 at 12.30 p.m. when both the counsel are directed to come prepare.
JUDGE