ORDER SHEET

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1158 of 2013 _____________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.11710/2015

04.09.2015.

Syed Ahsan Imam, Advocate for the Plaintiff

Mr.Kh.Saiful Islam holding brief for Mr.Kh.Shamsul Islam, Advocate for the defendant No.1

Mr.Qazi Mahid Ali, AAG

Mr.Ghulam Akbar Lashari, Advocate for SBCA

------

Mr.Muhammad Shahzad, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama for KW&SB. It is reported that Mr.Kh.Shamsul Islam, Advocate for defendant No.1 is on general adjournment upto 15.09.2015. Learned counsel for the defendant No.1 is directed to file counter affidavit to CMA No.11710/2015 before the next date. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the approved building plan was for 14 floors, but the defendant No.1 has also raised 15th floor without any lawful authority and approval of SBCA. Learned counsel for SBCA is directed to call the concerned officer of the SBCA on the next date who shall submit his report whether the defendant No.1 has raised the 15th floor without approved building plan or not. By consent adjourned to 18.9.2015.

Judge

Urgency granted. Counsel for the plaintiff has moved this urgency application which is supported by affidavit of the plaintiff verified by ISMS of this court. In the affidavit it is clearly mentioned by the plaintiff that the matter has been resolved therefore, he does not want to

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1754 of 2014 _____________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For orders on CMA No.12583/2015

04.09.2015.

Mr.Zahid Hussain Soomro, Advocate for the Plaintiff

------

Counsel for the plaintiff has moved this urgent application which is supported by affidavit of the plaintiff verified by ISMS of this court, urgency granted. In the affidavit it is clearly mentioned by the plaintiff that the matter has been resolved therefore, he does not want to press the instant suit. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also moved another application under Order 23 Rule 1 CPC for withdrawal of the suit. This application is taken on record. Office is directed to mark CMA number on this application. In view of the above statement, the suit is dismissed as withdrawn along with pending application.

JUDGE

Let fresh notice be issued to the defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4 to ensure that on the next date their counsel will appear, as since 2008 10 applications are pending in this case. Despite clear orders passed by this court on 25.8.20108 the plaintiff has failed to deposit the amount with the Nazir of this court. Let this matter be fixed in court on 29.9.2015.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.375 of 2008 _____________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

04.09.2015.

MR.Abdul Hameed Iqbal, Advocate for the Plaintiff

Mr.Muhammad Ahmer, Advocate for the defendant No.2

None present for the defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4.

------

Let fresh notice be issued to the defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4 to ensure that on the next date their counsel will appear, as since 2008 10 applications are pending in this case. The learned counsel for the defendants submits that despite clear orders passed by this court on 25.8.20108 the plaintiff has failed to deposit the amount with the Nazir of this court. Let this matter be fixed in court on 29.9.2015.

JUDGE

Counsel for the defendant has supplied copy of counter affidavit to the counsel for the plaintiff. But I find out that this counter affidavit to the contempt application is on behalf of defendant Nos.1 to 2 (alleged contemnor Muhammad Arif Jeewa) and for filing counter affidavit of Mohsin Abubakar Shakhani (alleged contemnor No.3) he requests for time. Adjourned.

Judge

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.712 of 2009 _____________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.7540/2011

04.09.2015.

Mirza Mehmood Baig, Advocate for the Plaintiff

Mr.Taha Kamal, Advocate for the defendant Nos.1, 2, 4 and 7.

------

Counsel for the defendant has supplied copy of counter affidavit to the counsel for the plaintiff. But I find out that this counter affidavit to the contempt application has been filed by alleged contemnor Nos.1 to 2 (Muhammad Arif Jeewa) and for filing counter affidavit of Mohsin Abubakar Shakhani (alleged contemnor No.3) he requests for time. Adjourned.

Judge

on behalf of

Through this suit the plaintiff has challenged the amended order dated 28.2.2015 and 29.2.2012 for the years 2010 and 2011

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1127 of 2014 _____________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.9088/2014

04.09.2015.

Mr.Ayan Memon, Advocate for the Plaintiff

Mr.Kashif Hanif, Advocate for the defendants.

Ms.Tabbasum Ghazanfar, Standing Counsel.

------

Counsel for the plaintiff submits that copies of written statement and counter affidavit to CMA No.9086/2014 have not been supplied to him. On the contrary, Mr.Kashif Hanif, Advocate for the defendants submits that he has already supplied the same to counsel for the plaintiff. Be that as it may, fresh copies may be supplied to the plaintiff’s counsel so that he may be able to prepare the brief before the next date. By consent adjourned to 29.9.2015. Interim order to continue till next date.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1126 of 2014 _____________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.9086/2014

04.09.2015.

Mr.Ayan Memon, Advocate for the Plaintiff

Mr.Kashif Hanif, Advocate for the defendants.

Ms.Tabbasum Ghazanfar, Standing Counsel.

------

JUDGE

1. Deferred.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. It is inter alia contended that the NAB has filed Reference No.16/2014 against various accused persons including the present petitioner, who is accused No.2 in the reference. The reference relates to banking fraud and earlier FIA lodged an FIR No.51/2015 and the challan of the case was submitted before Special Court (Offences in Banks) Karachi but subsequently on the application of NAB under Section 16-A(a) of NAO, 1999 the case was transferred to the Accountability Court and supplementary reference was filed. Learned counsel also invited our attention to the reference in which 09 accused persons have been shown on bail and this fact is also mentioned in paragraph No.7 of the petition with the names of the applicants who are at present on bail in this reference. Learned counsel argued that the petitioner may also be granted pre-arrest bail in the same reference. He also referred to the order passed in C.P.No.D-861/2015 to show that the accused No.15 was granted interim pre-arrest bail while two other accused persons were granted pre-arrest bail in C.P.No.D-6265/2014 and one more order is attached, in which post arrest bail was granted in C.P.No.D-2152/2015. Without touching the merits of the case, issue notice to the DPG, NAB. Meanwhile, the petitioner is granted interim pre-arrest bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lacs only) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this court. To come up on 7.9.2015 for confirmation or otherwise.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1645 of 2015

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12525/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.12525/2015

02.09.2015

Mr.Mehmoodul Hassan, Advocate for the Plaintiff

----

1. Granted.

2. It is inter alia contended that the plaintiffs are lessee of different units in the project constructed on Plot No.10-C, South Park Avenue, Phase-Extension, DHA Karachi. Lease was granted by defendant No.1 and defendant No.2 is husband of defendant No.1. According to the agreement, it was the responsibility of the defendant Nos.1 and 2 to provide electricity to the plaintiffs, but they have not taken any step and all the occupants are facing difficulties and as and when they approached the defendants Nos.1 and 2 for providing electricity, they use to cause harassment and issue threats to the plaintiffs. Issue notice to the defendants as well as A.A.G. for 9.9.2015. In the meanwhile, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 shall act strictly in accordance with law.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.694 of 2015

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12489/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.12490/2015

02.09.2015

Mr.Muhammad Qutubuzzaman, Advocate for the Plaintiff

----

1. Granted.

2. This is first date in court when the counsel for the plaintiff has moved this application for withdrawal of the suit unconditionally. The application is duly supported by personal affidavit of the counsel. He further stated that the plaintiff is his wife. It appears that no notice of any pending application was issued to the defendants, but only summons were issued by the Additional Registrar of this court for 3.9.2015. Since the counsel for the plaintiff does not want to proceed further, the suit is dismissed as withdrawn unconditionally.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

J.M.No.20 of 2013

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

02.09.2015

Mr.Masoor-ul-Arfin, Advocate for the Petitioner

Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are also present.

Mr.M.M.Aqil Awan, Advocate for the Respondents

Respondent No.1 is present along with Mr.Moinuddin Haider.

Mr.Mansoor Ghangro, Advocate

----

Though this a winding up petition, but the parties have agreed to resolve the dispute amicably. The respondent No.1 agrees to buyout the shareholding of petitioners possessed by them in respondent No.3 company and it is further stated that earlier also an attempt was made by the parties to amicably resolve the dispute, but due to some reasons the compromise could not be materialized. However, they admitted that in the past valuation of the entire shareholdings/equity of the respondent No.3 was evaluated. The petitioners assessed the value according to their estimation in the sum of Rs.13,75,00,000/- while the respondents estimated the value in the sum of Rs. 11 crores. Now the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 and on behalf of petitioner No.1, Mr.Mansoorul Arfin and the respondent No.1 and his counsel have principally agreed that the value of total shareholdings of the company shall be Rs.13,0500,000/-. The respondent No.1 agrees to buyout the shareholding of the petitioners in the same value but proportionate to their shareholdings. It is further stated by the respondent No.1 that 50% amount of sale consideration will be paid at the time of signing of the share purchase agreement while 50% amount will be paid within a year and in order to secure and safeguard the interest of the petitioners, postdated cheques will be issued by the respondent No.1 to the petitioners individually. It is further stated that if the share purchase agreement is finalized, no further or future claim will be lodged by the petitioners and respondent Nos.1 and 2 against each other. The respondent No.1 further submits that if share purchase agreement is signed, the petitioners shall transfer 50% shares to the respondent No.1 on the date of payment and shall also execute the share transfer deeds in his name equivalent to the amount of payment and handover original share certificates also and remaining share certificates shall be handed over by the petitioners to the respondent No.1 on making full and final payment. After recording this understanding and off course subject to signing of shares purchase agreement, it is mutually agreed that Mr.Mansoor-ul-Arfin, Advocate will prepare a draft of share purchase agreement and send a copy to the respondent No.1 for consideration. By consent the matter is adjourned to 16.09.2015, when the petitioners and respondent No.1 shall be in attendance to apprise the court regarding the fate of their compromise and further proceedings in the matter.

JUDGE

AUTHORITY LETTER

I, Muhammad Sabir Syed, Architect and Town Planner do hereby authorize Mr.Muhammad Iqbal Ch. Advocate having office at Suite No.70-71, 3^rd Floor, Block-4, Habib Chambers, Gulshan-e-IQbal Karachi to appear on my behalf before Deputy Commissioner Sindh Revenue Board Government of Sindh Shaheen Complex Karachi in respect of Show Cause Notice dated 26.5.2015 issued to me and to file any application reply on my behalf and defend the same with powers.

(MUHAMMAD SABIR SYED)

laintiff.

Mr.Abdul Karim Leghari, Standing Counsel.

Mr.Khadim Hussain, Advocate for defendant No.2

Ghulam Rasool Shaikh, General Manager, of defendant No.2

---

Despite passing of order by this court on 8.5.2015 and the statement of the counsel for the defendant No.2 and their representative recorded on 20.8.2015, learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that interim order has not been complied with and for trying the contemnors their counter affidavits are necessary, but on their behalf Kamran Mirza Mughal has filed counter affidavits. Learned counsel for the defendant No.2 requests for time to file counter affidavit of the alleged contemnors Nos.1 to 4 on the next date. Adjourned to 16.9.2015. On the next date the main application will also be heard along with contempt application. Interim order to continue till next date.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1483 of 2015

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.11532/2015

01.09.2015

Mr.Abdul Qayyum Abbasi, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Mr.Mehfooz Yar Khan, Advocate for the defendant Nos.1 and 2.

Mr.Abid Naseem, Advocate for defendant No.5.

---

Counsel for the plaintiff has submitted a statement in which it is stated that the plaintiff is ready to handover 02 pay orders to the defendant Nos.1 and 2 against the due amount of postdated cheques presented in the bank. Counsel for the defendant Nos.1 and 2 requests for time to call the representative of defendant Nos.1 and 2, so that the matter could be resolved. By consent adjourned to 3.9.2015.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1052 of 2015

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.11259/2015

01.09.2015

Mr.Muhammad Ali Lakhani, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Mr.Khalid Jawed, Advocate for the defendant No.1

---

Mr.Khalid Jawed, Advocate has filed Vakalatnma for the defendant No.1 and requests for time to file counter affidavit.

Repeat notice to the alleged contemnors for filing their comments and no further time will be allowed. Adjourned to 23.9.2015. Interim order to continue till next date.

For the private defendants in the suit no report has been available to show that the private defendants have been served or not. Counsel for the defendant No.1 pointed out that all have been arrayed through Chairman’s Secretariat, PIAC Head Office Karachi therefore, it is difficult to serve and check each individual employee for the service as they are posted at different places. Counsel for the plaintiff submits that they may be served through H.R. Passenger Service Department. Office is directed to serve all the private defendants through Manager, H.R. Passenger Service Department, PIAC Karachi, who will also submit the service report on the next date.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1051 of 2015

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.11257/2015

01.09.2015

Mr.Muhammad Ali Lakhani, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Mr.Khalid Jawed, Advocate for the defendant No.1

---

Mr.Khalid Jawed, Advocate has filed Vakalatnma for the defendant No.1 and requests for time to file counter affidavit.

None present for the alleged contemnors. Repeat notice to the alleged contemnors for filing their comments and no further time will be allowed. Adjourned to 23.9.2015. Interim order to continue till next date.

JUDGE

Learned counsel for the plaintiff argued that the plaintiff imported spare parts of motorcycle from China and his clearing agent filed goods declaration to defendant Nos.3 and 4. The customs authorities conducted complete assessment under Section 80 of the Custom Act and valuation ruling 685/2014 dated 15.9.2014.

The plaintiff has challenged the valuation ruling 685/2014 on the ground that the same is not applicable in his case. It is further stated that the operation of the same ruling has been suspended by this court in Suit Nos.2556 and 2557 of 2014. During pendency of the suit the plaintiff prays that his goods may be released on furnishing bank guarantee or deposit of pay order to the equivalent of differential amount of duties and taxes with the Nazir of this court. Both the learned counsel for the defendants have no objection, if the differential amount of duties and taxes are deposited with the Nazir of this court, thereafter the goods will be released. In view of the above, the plaintiff may deposit the pay orders of the differential amount of duties and taxes with the Nazir of this court and when the pay order is deposited with the Nazir, he shall issue certificate of payment along with photocopy of pay order to the customs authorities thereafter the goods will be released to the plaintiff immediately. By consent this application (CMA No.10834/2015) is disposed of. Let the defendants filed their written statement within one month.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1377 of 2015

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.10834/2015

01.09.2015

Mr.Ammar Yaser, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Ms.Masooda Siraj, Advocate for the defendant No.4

Ms.Afsheen Aman, Advocate for the defendant No.2

None present for the defendant Nos.1and 3.

---

Learned counsel for the plaintiff argued that the plaintiff imported spare parts of motorcycle from China and his clearing agent filed goods declaration to defendant Nos.3 and 4. The customs authorities assessed the consignment under Section 80 of the Custom Act and Valuation Ruling 685/2014 dated 15.9.2014.

The plaintiff has challenged the valuation ruling 685/2014 on the ground that the same is not applicable in his case. It is further stated that the operation of the same ruling has been suspended by this court in Suit Nos.2556 and 2557 of 2014. During pendency of the suit the plaintiff prays that his goods may be released on furnishing bank guarantee or deposit of pay order equivalent to the differential amount of duties and taxes with the Nazir of this court. Both the learned counsel for the defendants have no objection, if the differential amount of duties and taxes are deposited with the Nazir of this court, thereafter the goods will be released. In view of the above, the plaintiff may deposit the pay orders of the differential amount of duties and taxes with the Nazir of this court and after due certification the goods will be released by the customs authorities to the plaintiff. By consent this application (CMA No.10834/2015) is disposed of. Let the defendants file their written statement within one month. Office is directed to fix this suit with Suit Nos.2556 and 2557 of 2014.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.993 of 2008

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12232/2015

2.For hearing of CMA No.7238/2008

3.For hearing of CMA No.16806/2014

4.For examination of the parties/settlement of issues.

5.For further proceedings.

01.09.2015

Mr.Shahzeb Akhter Khan, Advocate for the plaintiff.

Mr.Irfan Hassan, Advocate for the defendant (KMC).

---

Learned Counsel for KMC has moved this application under Rule 159 of Sindh Chief Court Rules r/w Section 151 CPC. Along with this application he has also attached written statement of defendant No.1. Learned counsel for the plaintiff argued that this application has been filed for bringing the written statement on record, while the same defendant has filed CMA No.16806/2014 under Order 1 Rule 10 (2) r/w Section 151 CPC for deletion of the name of defendant No.1 from the array of the defendants, which is not possible. Learned counsel for the defendants submits that if the written statement of defendant No.1 is take on record he will not press this application for the time being, on which the learned counsel for the plaintiff agreed. The written statement is taken on record and CMA No.16806/2014 is dismissed as withdrawn for the time being.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Execution No.137 of 1999

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on O.A. Reference No.132015

2.For order as to non-prosecution to CMA No.227/2015

01.09.2015

Mr.Neil Keshove, Advocate for the Decree Holder.

---

1. Earlier on 3.8.2015 no objection of counsel for the decree holder was recorded to the acceptance of highest bid of Vijay Kumar in the sum of Rs.1.60 crore and on his no objection the court accepted the offer and directed him to pay the balance sale consideration within 15 days. Now the Official Assignee has sought permission through his reference to hand over the possession of the property to the purchaser as he has deposited the entire sale consideration. Again learned counsel for the Decree Holder has no objection. The official assignee reference is taken on record and after due satisfaction and fulfillment of all requirements the possession may be handed over to the highest bidder and the amount of sale consideration may be released to the decree holder after due verification and identification. The official assignee reference is disposed of.

2. This application is fixed for non-prosecution. On 3.8.2015, notice was ordered to be issued. Neither the applicant Amber Ahmed is present nor her counsel. The application is otherwise fixed for non-prosecution, which is dismissed.

JUDGE

Mr.Shahnawaz, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama for the defendants and requests for time to file counter affidavit. Let him file counter affidavit with advance copy to the learned counsel for the plaintiff. By consent adjourned to 8.9.2015. In the meanwhile, no third party interest shall be created in the jogging track area which was licensed to the plaintiff in terms of licensed agreement dated 30.8.2011.

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1575 of 2015

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA NO.12216/2015

01.09.2015

Syed Mehmood Alam Rizvi, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

---

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.595 of 2006

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For further orders.

01.09.2015

Mr.Mushtaque Memon, Advocate for the plaintiff.

Mr.Abdul Qayuum Abbasi, Advocate for the intervener

Ms.Mehrun Nisa, Advocate for the Defendant No.1

Mr.Qazi Majid Ali, AAG

---

Learned counsel for the plaintiff argued that despite passing clear order by this court on 11.2.2015 the same has not been complied with. The matter is pending in the office of defendant No.1. Today counsel for the defendant No.1 has filed a statement in which an excuse has been shown that the Board has not been constituted. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has filed a statement along with one document, Copy of the same has been supplied to the learned counsel for the defendant No.1. The learned counsel for the plaintiff invited my attention to the order dated 29.4.2015 on which date show cause notice was issued to the Executive Officer, Malir Cantonment Board, Karachi but no reply has been filed so far. Learned counsel for the defendant No.1 is directed to call Executive Officer, Malir Cantonment Board, Karachi (defendant No.1) on the next date to show as to why the court’s order dated 11.2.2015 has not been complied with. By consent adjourned to 15.09.2015.

JUDGE

2. It is inter alia contended that the plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 and other family members were shareholders and directors of M/s.Niraav Rice Processing Pakistan (Pvt) Limited, which was formed on 26.05.2008 to carry on the business of rice processing and export. The name of the company was changed on 04.3.2010 to M/s.Brukfield Rice Pakistan (Pvt) Limited. The names of shareholders are mentioned in paragraph 6 of the plaint. The defendant Nos.1 to 3 belong to a group of companies incorporated in Abu-Dhabi, UAE. Learned counsel referred to a term sheet which is available at page-121 of the court file, which is a sort of MoU entered into between the defendant Nos.1 and 2 and Brukfield Rice Pakistan (Pvt) Limited. Learned counsel also pointed out page-125 (page 23 of the term sheet) which relates to the company management in which the modalities to run the company through board of directors were agreed and it is mentioned that the plaintiff No.1 will appoint CEO and the defendant Nos.1 and 2 will appoint GM, the Finance Controller and the Purchase Manager. Learned counsel argued that in violation of the term sheet and sale purchase agreement dated 23.9.2011 the defendants want to oust the plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 from the management of Plaintiff No.3. Issue notice to the defendants for 4.9.2015. In the meanwhile, the defendants shall not take any action against the plaintiffs without due process of law.

Ns Judge

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.246 of 2013

_____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For orders on CMA No.12283/2015

28.08.2015

Mr.Muhammad Vawda, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Mr.Shafaat Hussain, Advocate for the defendant No.2

Mr.Naseer Ahmed, Advocate for the defendant No.1

Shaukat Ali Bhatti attorney of Muhammad Naveed (defendant No.2) present in person.

---

Counsel for the defendant No.2 has moved this urgent application, which is granted. Lastly notice was issued to the defendant No.1, who his confined in Central Prison Karachi, so that he may engage counsel. Today Mr.Naseer Ahmed, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on bhalf of the attorney of defendant No.1 and he has also attached special power of attorney of Shamail Sikandar (defendant No.1) in favour of Ghulam Ahmed. The special power of attorney is verified by Superintendent Central Prison Karachi. Since the Government of Sindh is also party in this case, let notice of compromise application may also be issued to the A.A.G.

The attorney of defendant No.2 Mr.Shaukat Ali Bhatti is present, who has signed the compromise application on behalf of the defendant No.2. He submits that due to illness of his son he has to leave the country today therefore, he would not be able to attend the court personally on the next date, however, he admits that he has signed the compromise application on behalf of defendant No.2 and the original power of attorney executed by defendant No.2 in his favour with the power to compromise the matter is already attached in the connected Suit No.1056/2012. Since Shaukat Ali Bhatti attorney of defendant No.2 admits his signature on the compromise application and also agreed to the terms and conditions mentioned in the compromised application, therefore, he needs not to appear on the next date, however, remaining parties are directed to appear in the court for recording their compromise. Let this matter be fixed on 4.9.2015.

JUDGE

has recognized his signatures and affirmed

1. Granted.

2. It is inter alia contended that the plaintiff is son of defendant No.2 while the defendant No.1 is his real uncle. Learned counsel argued that on 7.11.1989 the grandfather of the plaintiff gifted his property to the defendant No.2 photocopy of registered declaration of oral gift is available at page-23, thereafter defendant No.2 being real father of the plaintiff gifted out this property to the plaintiff on 9.5.2013, photocopy of registered declaration and confirmation of oral gift deed of immoveable property is available at page-43. When the plaintiff approached for mutation of the said property he was informed that on 27.9.1992 the same property was gifted out again by his grandfather Haji Muhammad Ayub Khan to his uncle Muhammad Hashim Khan (defendant No.1). Learned counsel argued that in presence of valid subsistence declaration of oral gift deed the subsequent declaration of gift deed is liable to be cancelled which was executed unlawfully. He requests that some interim orders may be passed so that the defendant No.1 may not create third party interest. Issue notice to the defendants as well as AAG for 4.9.2015. In the meanwhile, no third party interest shall be created in the property in question.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1567 of 2015

_____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12167/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.12168/2015

28.08.2015

Mr.Mustafa Lakhani, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

---

1. Granted.

2. It is inter alia contended that the plaintiff is son of defendant No.2 while the defendant No.1 is his real uncle. Learned counsel argued that on 7.11.1989 the grandfather of the plaintiff gifted his property i.e. survey No.27/2, survey sheet No.N.P.8, Napier Quarters, Karachi to the defendant No.2 photocopy of registered declaration of oral gift is available at page-23, thereafter defendant No.2 being real father of the plaintiff gifted out this property to the plaintiff on 9.5.2013, photocopy of registered declaration and confirmation of oral gift deed of immoveable property is available at page-43. When the plaintiff approached for mutation of the said property he was informed that on 27.9.1992 the same property was gifted out again by his grandfather Haji Muhammad Ayub Khan to his uncle Muhammad Hashim Khan (defendant No.1). Learned counsel argued that in presence of valid and subsisting declaration of oral gift deed the subsequent declaration of gift deed of the property could not be executed before cancellation of earlier one. He requests that some interim orders may be passed so that the defendant No.1 may not create third party interest. Issue notice to the defendants as well as AAG for 4.9.2015. In the meanwhile, no third party interest shall be created in the property in question.

JUDGE

and defendant are legal heirs of deceased Shakar Khanum widow of Essa Bhai Lakhani (late), who died at Karachi on 13.10.2002. Learned counsel pointed out annexure-A (page-190 which is a transfer/mutation order of plot No.22 category “F” Block/Sector 7 measuring 448 sq.yards Scheme-5 Clifton Karachi, which was owned by deceased Shakar Khanum and at present it is in possession of the defendant, who does not want to administer the estate of deceased and distribute the shares among other legal heirs. Learned counsel submits that in order to preserve the aforesaid property interim orders are solicited so that third party interest may not be created by the defendant. Issue notice to the defendant for 4.9.2015. In the meanwhile, status quo to be maintained.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1568 of 2015

_____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12169/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.12170/2015

28.08.2015

Mr.Mustafa Lakhani, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

---

1. Granted.

2. It is inter alia contended that the plaintiffs and defendant are legal heirs of deceased Shakar Khanum widow of Essa Bhai Lakhani (late), who died at Karachi on 13.10.2002. Learned counsel pointed out annexure-A (page-190 which is a transfer/mutation order of plot No.22 category “F” Block/Sector 7 measuring 448 sq.yards Scheme-5 Clifton Karachi, which was owned by deceased Shakar Khanum and at present it is in possession of the defendant, who does not want to administer the estate of deceased and distribute the shares among other legal heirs. Learned counsel submits that in order to preserve the aforesaid property interim orders are solicited so that third party interest may not be created by the defendant. Issue notice to the defendant for 4.9.2015. In the meanwhile, status quo to be maintained.

JUDGE

re sons and daughters of deceased Essa Bhai Lakhani while the defendant is their real uncle. Learned counsel arguedthat on 7.11.189

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1483 of 2015

_____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.11532/2015

28.08.2015

Mr.Abdul Qayyum Abbasi, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff is also present.

Mr.Mehfooz Yar Khan, Advocate for the defendant Nos.1 and 2.

Mr.Mukhtiar Ali Metlo holding brief for Mr.Jam Asif Mehmood, Advocate for defendant No.5.

None present for the defendant No.4.

---

Due to sad demise of Mr.Justice (Retired) Zafar Hussain Mirza , the hon’ble Chief Justice has suspend the court work after 10.00 a.m. By consent adjourned to 01.09.2015.

Judge

Applicant

….

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Execution No.34 of 2015

_____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.260/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.261/2015

3.Fo orders on execution application

27.08.2015

Mr.Tahir Saleem Mangi, Advocate for the Applicant

….

1. Granted.

2-3. This execution application has been filed by defendant No.1 of Suit No.1086/2012 on the premise that the suit was decreed by way of compromise and it was agreed that the plaintiff Jama Masjid Abdullah and Madarsa will hand over physical possession of the 2500 sq.yards of land to the defendant No.1, who is applicant in this execution application. Learned counsel argued that the Jamia Masjid Abdullah and Madarsa Trust not only failed to hand over the peace of land to the applicant in terms of compromised degree but they are also trying to encroach the same for raising construction in violation of the decree. Issue notice to the respondents for 3.9.2015. In the meanwhile, the parties are directed to maintain status quo.

JUDGE

for the satisfaction of comprise decree passed by this court on 7.5.0214

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.139 of 2007

_____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For final arguments

27.08.2015

Mr.Shahanshah Hussain, Advocate for the Plaintiff

Mr.Agha Zafar, Advocate for the defendant.

Mr.Pervaiz Ahmed Siddiqui, Law Officer of MCB.

….

On the last date of hearing notice was issued to the defendant No.4 through its Legal Department to apprise this court whether the order passed by this court on 27.2.2007 has been complied with or not. Today Mr.Pervaiz Ahmed Siddiqui, Law Officer of MCB present in court and submit a report duly signed by the Branch Manager MCB, Hattar Branch, District Haripr, KPK in which it is clearly mentioned that in compliance of the court’s order dated 27.2.2007 the bank had marked “lien” over the amount of Rs.18,90,626/- lying in the account No.0043065731005647 of M/s. Diamond Weld Rods (Pvt) Ltd. and along with report a statement of the account has also attached which shows the total balance is Rs.21 lacs.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff requests that before further proceedings in the matter direction may be issued to the defendant No.4 to deposit this amount with the Nazir of this court. Law officer of defendant No.4 has no objection. Let defendant No.4 deposit this amount with the Nazir of this court within two weeks and the Nazir shall submit his report before this court. By consent adjourned to 15.9.2015.

JUDGE

ith for submitting report. By consent adjourned to 27.8.2015.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

J.Misc.No.17 of 2012

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.176/2015

27.08.2015

Mr.Mushtaq Qaderi, Advocate for the respondent No.9

Ms.Sofia Saeed, Advocate for the respondent No.8

…..

Mr.Khadim Ali Metlo, Advocate holding brief for Mr.Saleem Thebdawala, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed this application under Rule 50 of the Sindh Chief Court Rules for the discharge of his Vakalatnama, along with application he has also attached a notice dated 8.8.2015, which shows that the learned counsel for the petitioner has intimated the petitioner for toady’s date of hearing but nobody is present. The Vakalatnama of Mr.Saleem Thepdawala, Advocate is discharged and office is directed to issue fresh notice to the petitioner to make alternate arrangement. Office is also directed to strike out the name of the Mr.Saleem Thepdawala, Advocate from the file cover.

Judge

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1504 of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.11695/2015

27.08.2015

Mirza Qasim Baig, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Mr.Farmanullah, Advocate undertakes to file power on behalf of defendant No.2

…..

The plaintiffs have challenged the Gas Infrastructure Development Cess, Act 2015 and also made parties the Federation of Pakistan, and OGRA. Since the collection agency of the Cess are Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd. and Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Ltd. so they have also been arrayed as defendant Nos.2 and 3. To a question raised by this court as to why the suit has been filed against Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Ltd. in the territorial jurisdiction of this court, the learned counsel responded that the plaintiff’s head offices are situated in Karachi and various suits are pending in this court for challenging the vires of Gas Infrastructure Development Cess, Act 2015, therefore, the plaintiffs have opted to file suit in this court. The other connected suits were fixed today in which the same controversy is involved and by consent of the counsel for the plaintiff and defendants the matter is adjourned to 1.10.2015 with the clear understanding that issue of law will be framed and the case will be decided on the available documents and arguments. Notice was issued to the Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Ltd. also but nobody is present for them. Repeat notice to the defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4 again for the next date. The same interim order as already passed in suit Nos.1291/15 and 1503/2015 will operate in this case. To come up on 1.10.2015 with other connected matters.

JUDGE

that and is ultra vires to the provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan and the defendants have no authority to claim Gas Infrastructure Development Cess. Numerous suits are pending in this court in which the same Act has been challenged by various plaintiffs and interim orders are already operating. Learned counsel requests that the same interim orders be passed in this suit also. Issue notice to the defendants. Also issue notice to the Attorney General for Pakistan under Order 27-A CPC. In the meanwhile, the same interim orders as already passed in Suit No.1291/2015 will operate in this suit. To come up on 27.8.2015 with the connected suits.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.485 of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For hearing of CMA No.4976/2015

2.For hearing of CMA No.4977/2015

3.For hearing of CMA No.4978/2015

27.08.2015

Mr.Arshad Hussain, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Mr.Yasir Shah, Advocate for defendant Nos.1 to 4.

Mr.Tanveer Ahmed, Director of defendant No.7 present in person.

Ms.Aisha, Advocate

…..

Counsel for defendant Nos.1 to 4 requests for time to file counter affidavit on behalf of defendant Nos.1to 4. Ms.Aisha, Advocate undertakes to file Vakalatmana for defendant Nos.5 to 8.

Counsel for the plaintiff invited my attention to an application CMA No.4976/2015 in which he has made a request to make inspection through Nazir of this court as the plaintiff’s claim that defendant Nos.5 to 8 are infringing the intellectual property rights of the plaintiff and without any legal authority they are manufacturing the products in the name of Ahmed Foods which is a registered trademark and copyright of the plaintiff.

Mr.Tanveer Ahmed, Director of defendant No.7 present in person submits that the products are being manufactured under the license of plaintiff for last several years and he requests for time to file relevant documents with his counter affidavit before the next date. Since it is admitted by the Director of the defendant No.7 that they are manufacturing the products for last several years, therefore, the learned counsel for the plaintiff does not want to press the CMA Nos.4976 and 4977 of 2015, which are dismissed as not pressed. Let counter affidavit be filed by the defendants to CMA No.4978/2015 only so that the matter may be decided in accordance with law. By consent adjourned to 15.9.2015.

JUDGE

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

3. Through this suit the plaintiff has challenged the notice issued by the defendant No.2 under Section 122(9) and 122(5A)(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 being illegal and without jurisdiction. Likewise the amended order has also been impugned with the notice of demand issued by defendant No.2. Learned counsel referred to case of EFU General Insurance Co. Limited v. Federation of Pakistan & others, reported in 1997 PTD 1693 and argued that the while the passing the impugned order the dictum laid down by the hon’ble Supreme Court was not considered by the defendant No.2. He further argued that the appeal against the impugned order is pending before defendant No.3 [Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeal-I), LTU, PRC Tower, M.T. Khan Road, Karachi] along with application for stay against the recovery but neither the appeal was fixed for hearing nor the stay application was heard despite urgency but the defendant No.2 is bent upon to initiate coercive measure against the plaintiff for recovery of demand including the attachment of accounts, therefore, learned counsel requests that as an interim measure the defendants may be restrained from taking any coercive action against the plaintiff including, but not limited to, freezing/attachments of bank accounts and adjustment of demand against refunds. Issue notice to the defendants as well as D.A.G. for 2.9.2015. In the meanwhile, no coercive action shall be taken against the plaintiff till next date.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Habib Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12123/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12124/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

IGI Insurance Ltd……..……..….vs……………...…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12125/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12126/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Reliance Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12131/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12132/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Reliance Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12129/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12130/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Reliance Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12127/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12128/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Century Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12113/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12114/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Century Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12121/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12122/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Century Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12117/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12118/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Century Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12115/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12116/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Century Insurance Company Ltd……..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12119/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12120/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

EFU General Insurance Ltd………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12103/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12104/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

EFU General Insurance Ltd………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12107/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12108/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

EFU General Insurance Ltd………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12111/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12112/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

EFU General Insurance Ltd………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12105/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12106/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

EFU General Insurance Ltd………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12109/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12110/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

EFU Life Assurance Ltd………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12133/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12134/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

EFU Life Assurance Ltd………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12135/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12136/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

EFU Life Assurance Ltd………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

1.For orders on CMA No.12137/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12138/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

Jubilee General……………………..….vs…………..…..F.B.R. & others

Insurance Co. Ltd.

1.For orders on CMA No.12098/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12099/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Khalid Anwar, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. The office has raised the objection that court fee has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed for payment of court fee.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

J.M.No.03 of 2006

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.174/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.175/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Haq Nawaz Chatta, Advocate for the Petitioner.

---

1. This urgent application has been filed by counsel for the petitioner, which is granted.

2. Learned counsel has moved this application under Section 151 CPC, in which it is stated that one suit filed by the petitioner has been decreed but for filing execution application the Nazir has to appoint Advocate who is liquidator in this case. Let notice of this application be issued to the Nazir of this court to ensure his presence on the next date.

Nazir is also directed to submit his report as to what efforts have been made so far for the purposes of winding up of the petitioner.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1565 of 2015

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12163/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.12164/2015

3.For orders on CMA No.12165/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Shakeel Ahmed, Advocate for the Plaintiff

---

1. Granted.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. Through this suit the plaintiff has challenged the show cause notice dated 14.7.20015 on the ground that the same has been issued illegally, malafidely and without lawful authority. He argued that in the show cause notice the alleged incident of 1.9.203 has been quoted and in this regard earlier also the cognizance was taken and the license of the plaintiff was unlawfully suspended, which was challenged in the constitution petition and the notice was struck down however, the respondents were left at liberty to take action if the circumstances, so warrant but again without any lawful justification show cause notice has been issued as to why the license of the plaintiff should not be cancelled. Learned counsel also quoted the judgment dated 16.4.2012 passed in special case No.10 of 2003 by the CNS Court Naushahro Feroze and argued that the officials of the plaintiff were not the accused in that case. Learned counsel submits that the matter is fixed before the concerned authority on 27.8.2015 and reply to the show cause notice will be submitted by the plaintiff but he apprehends that without affording any opportunity of hearing the matter will be decided by the authority against the plaintiff and coercive action will be taken.

Issue notice to the defendants as well as D.A.G. for 2.9.2015. In the meanwhile, the proceeding pursuant to the show cause notice may continue but no final order shall be passed till next date.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.890 of 2015

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12025/2015

2.For hearing of CMA No.8544/2015

3.For hearing of CMA No.8545/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Sathi M. Ishaque, Advocate for the Plaintiffs.

Mr.Ziaul Haq Makhdoom, Advocate for the defendant.

…..

Counsel for the plaintiff has moved this urgent application with the request that the documents filed by him with the urgent application be taken on record. Instead of attaching the documents with the urgent application he should have filed the same with separate statement with copy to the counsel for the defendant. Learned counsel for the plaintiff requests for time to file the documents with separate statement. Office is directed to return all the photocopies of the documents attached with the CMA No.12025/2015 to the counsel for the plaintiff, so that he will re-submit the same along with statement subject to all just exceptions. Let this matter be fixed in court for hearing of all pending applications on 22.9.2015.

JUDGE

1. Granted.

2. To be complied with within a week.

3. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

4. It is inter alia contended that vide agreement dated 1.7.2012 the plaintiff entered into an agreement

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.nil of 2015

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12065/2015

2.For orders on office objection

3.For orders on CMA No.12066/2015

4.For orders on CMA No.12067/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Muhammad Aslam, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. To be complied with within a week.

3. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

4. It is inter alia contended that vide agreement dated 1.7.2012 the plaintiff entered into an agreement to sell with the defendant Nos.1 to 5 for Bungalow No.119/III, 29^th Street Phase-VI, measuring 500 sq.yards situated at DHA Karachi but due to some reasons the deal could not be materialized on the given date, therefore, the parties agreed to enter into an amended agreement to sell dated 22.07.2013 in which by consent the sale consideration was enhanced from Rs.1,79,00,000/- to Rs.2,08,000,00/-. Learned counsel submits that that the plaintiff has already paid Rs.35 lacs and still willing to pay the balance sale consideration if transfer documents are executed in his faovur but the defendants are avoiding the deal and they are trying to create third party interest. Issue notice to the defendants for 2.9.2015. In the meanwhile, the defendants Nos.1 to 5 are directed to maintain status quo.

JUDGE

Pakist

he office has raised the objection that proper court fee of Rs.15000/- has not been paid. At the oral request of learned counsel three days’ time is allowed to make up the deficiency in the court fee.

3. Through this suit the plaintiff has challenged the notice issued under Section 137(2) and 122(5A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 by defendant No.2 being illegal and constitutional and without any jurisdiction. Likewise the amended order has also been impugned with the notice of demand dated 12.6.2015 issued by defendant No.2. Learned counsel also referred to the EFU General Insurance Co. Limited v. The Federation of Pakistan & others, reported in 1997 PTD 1693 and argued that the while the passing the impugned order the dictum laid down by the hon’ble Supreme Court was not considered by the defendant No.2. Learned counsel argued that the appeal against the impugned order is pending before defendant No.3 [Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeal-I), LTU, PRC Tower, M.T. Khan Road, Karachi] along with application for stay against the recovery but neither the appeal was fixed for hearing nor the stay application was heard but the defendant No.2 is bent upon to initiate coercive measure against the plaintiff including the attachment of accounts, therefore, learned counsel requests that as interim measure the defendants may be restrained from taking any coercive action against the plaintiff including, but not limited to, freezing/attachments of bank accounts and adjustment of demand against refunds. Issue notice to the defendants as well as D.A.G. for 2.9.2015. In the meanwhile, no coercive action shall be taken against the plaintiff till next date.

JUDGE

on oral request Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. It is inter alia contended that on 12.8.2014 a show

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1555 of 2015

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12009/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.12010/2015

3.For orders on CMA No.12011/2015

26.08.2015

Mr.Nehal Hashmi, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

…..

1. Granted.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. It is inter alia contended that on 12.8.2014 a show cause notice was issued with the statement of allegations to the plaintiff for the reasons that her intermediate marks-sheet had been found forged by the Board, hence her appointment in the PIA was found illegal, therefore, she called upon to submit explanation. Learned counsel submits that reply to show cause notice has already been submitted and the matter is pending. He invited my attention to paragraph 16 of the plaint in which it is mentioned that the plaintiff prior filing this suit had approached NIRC and obtained prohibitory order but PIA has raised legal objection that the plaintiff is an employee of Pay Group-V, therefore, she cannot avail remedy created for workman under Industrial Relation, Act, 2012. Since legal objection has been raised therefore, the plaintiff wants to withdraw her petition from NIRC and approached this court for injunctive relief. Learned counsel for the plaintiff undertakes to withdraw the petition from NIRC today and submit the certified true copy of the order. Issue notice to the defendants for 2.9.2015. In the meanwhile, the proceedings pursuant to show cause notice may continue but no final order shall be passed against the plaintiff till next date.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1557 of 2015

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.12016/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.12017/2015

3.For orders on CMA No.12018/2015

25.08.2015

Mr.Nasrullah Malik, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

----

1. Granted.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. At the very outset the counsel for the plaintiff invited my attention to page-33 of the court file, which is a Sanad issued by Deputy Commissioner Malir Karachi to the plaintiff for plot No.600 situated at Village Ilyas, Taluka Bin Qasim District Malir Karachi. Learned counsel has also attached the paid challan dated 1.10.2012 in relation to the same land. Learned counsel argued that despite issuing Sanad the defendant Nos.4 and 6 to 10 are trying to dispossess the plaintiff from the aforesaid plot. Issue notice to the defendants as well as AAG for 1.9.2015. In the meanwhile, the defendants will maintain status quo in relation to the plaintiff’s plot for which Sanad has been issued.

Judge

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

J.Misc.No.35 of 1988

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.168/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.169/2015

25.08.2015

Mr.Qaimuddin Khawaja, Advocate for the alleged beneficiary.

------

Counsel for the alleged beneficiary Almas Amjad Chagani, has moved this urgent application (CMA No.168/2015) and the same counsel has also moved another application (CMA No.169/2015) for recalling the order, but neither the date of order is mentioned nor other relevant particulars, therefore, the learned counsel does not press these applications and want to file fresh application with better particulars.

Adjourned.

JUDGE

in the same application Granted.

2. The plaintiff has challenged the termination letter dated 9.6.2015. It is further contended that without issuing any show cause notice or seeking explanation the services of the plaintiff has been terminated. It is further stated that after termination the plaintiff had filed departmental appeal, which is pending without any decision, therefore, she has approached this court. Let notice be issued to the defendant for filing their counter affidavit. Adjourned to 31.8.2015.

JUDGE

It is 2:00 p.m. the court time is over. For want of time and by consent adjourned to 31.08.2015.

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P.No.D-4253 of 2015

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For katcha peshi.

2.For hearing of CMA No.18653/2015

3.For hearing of CMA No.18654/2015

24.08.2015

Mr.Farooq H.Naek, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr.Muhammad Altaf, ADPG, NAB.

Mr.Abdul Fateh, I.O. of NAB.

------

It is 2:00 p.m. the court time is over. For want of time and by consent adjourned to 31.08.2015.

Judge

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P.No.D-160 of 2015

_________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on office objection.

2.For katcha peshi.

3.For hearing of CMA No.607/2015

24.08.2015

Mr.Farooq H.Naek, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr.Muhammad Altaf, ADPG, NAB.

Mr.Abdul Fateh, I.O. of NAB.

------

It is 2:00 p.m. the court time is over. For want of time and by consent adjourned to 31.08.2015.

Judge

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1503 of 2015

______________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.11899/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.11900/2015

21.08.2015

Mr.Darvesh K. Mandhan, Advocate for the plaintiffs.

------

Learned counsel has moved this urgent application (CMA NO.11899/2015) for hearing of application (CMA NO.11900/2015) under Order 6 Rule 17 read with 151 CPC but at present he does not want to press this application which is dismissed as not pressed.

Learned counsel submits that due to typing error he could not mention the address of the plaintiff Nos.3 and 4 therefore, he requests for time to move proper application for allowing correction rather than amendment.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Admn. Suit No.28 of 2004

____________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.929/2006

21.08.2015

Mr.Sher Ali Rizvi, Advocate for the plaintiff.

Mr.Kh.Shamsul Islam, Advocate for the defendant.

------

Learned counsel for the plaintiff wants that hearing of CMA No.929/2006. which was adjourned sine die by this court vide order dated 29.11.2013 with the direction to await the outcome of restoration application. It is further stated in the order that once those matters have been resolved then any of the parties to this suit may file appropriate application for further consideration of the CMA No.929/2006. Learned counsel for the plaintiff requests for time to file proper application, so that the application CMA No.929/2006 may be fixed for hearing in court. Adjourned.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

J.M.No.42 of 2015

____________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.11898/2015

1.For hearing of CMA No.11529/2015

2.For hearing of CMA No.11530/2015

21.08.2015

Syed Jehangir Akhtar, Advocate for the Applicant

------

1. Granted.

2-3. The civil Suit No.1197/2007 was decreed by this court on 12.11.2014. The plaintiff sought declaration for entitlement of corridor/passage between Shops Nos.CA-8, CA-9, CA-10, CA-20 and CA-21 and space for amenity between Shops Nos.CA-18 and CA-19.

This application under Section 12 (2) C.P.C. has been filed by Saleem Ahmed on the strength of allotment order and possession order dated 30.01.1993 which shows that the defendant No.4 in the suit allotted on ownership basis shops of their project Hasan Centre to M/s.Grace Builders Limited and the said company allotted the four shops bearing Nos.CA-25 to CA-28 to the present applicant. Learned counsel argued that first time the factum of the above suit came into the knowledge of Saleem Ahmed on 10.7.2015 through legal notice when the suit was already decreed, so the applicant could not approach this court for impleading him as necessary and property party.

The grievance of the applicant is that he has leased out these shops to Summit Bank Ltd. and the officials of KBCA have marked some area of the shops for clear passage/space without any notice to the owner/occupants of the shops. He further argued that the decree has been obtained through fraud and misrepresentation and if some restraining orders are not passed, the applicant shall be highly prejudiced and his ownership rights will be jeopardized. Issue notice of this application to the plaintiff and defendants of Suit No.1195 of 2007 for 28.8.2015. In the meanwhile, KBCA shall not take any coercive action against the shop Nos.CA-25 to CA-28 Block-A, Hasan Centre, Block-16, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi till next date of hearing.

Judge

. Consequently, while disposing of the suit learned counsel four shop Nos.C-25 to CA-28 at Hasan Centre

aruged tha

for the

mandatory and permanent injunction.

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.1542 of 2015

______________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.11929/2015

2.For orders on CMA No.11930/2015

21.08.2015

Mr.Muhammad Ali Talpur, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

------

1. Granted.

2. Through this suit the plaintiff has challenged the levy of Regulatory Duty which has been imposed through SRO 601(I)/2015, and SRO 605(I)/2015.

The similar question was already dealt with by me in Suit No.1434 of 2015 in which after recording the controversy counsel for the plaintiff and defendants agreed that an issue of law may be framed and the entire matter may be disposed of on the basis of available documents and arguments and the matter was adjourned to 28.08.2015 for filing written statements and counter affidavits. Counsel for the customs and their representative conceded to their no objection in earlier Suit if the goods are released subject to deposit of differential amount of 15% of regulatory duty and taxes with the Nazir of this court and other duties and taxes will be paid to the customs authorities by the plaintiff. The learned counsel for the plaintiff also requests for passing the same order. Let notice be issued to the defendants as well as DAG for 28.8.2015. In the meanwhile, since the learned counsel for the plaintiff agrees to deposit the differential amount of regulatory duty with the Nazir of this court and the other duties and taxes will be paid to the defendants, therefore, the goods may be released and the amount of regulatory duty deposited by the plaintiff with the Nazir shall be invested in some government profit bearing scheme subject to final outcome of this suit. Immediately upon deposit of the amount of regulatory duty and its certification and verification by the Nazir, the goods of the plaintiff may be released by the defendants.

To come on 28.8.2015 with the Suit No.1434/2015.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.996 of 2015

______________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA Nos.

1. 9494/2015

2. 9041/2015

20.08.2015

Mr.Usman H. Hadi, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Ms.Masood Siraj, Advocate for defendant

----

Learned counsel for the defendant argued that though the operation of the letter dated 3.6.3015 has been suspended by this court, but the Port Qasim Authority on 5.6.2015 itself undertook to file the Goods Declaration of LNG Tugs on Monday, 8.6.2015. Learned counsel argued that despite undertaking no goods declaration has been filed while learned counsel for the plaintiff requests for time to seek instructions and he will also call the concerned officer of the plaintiff in court for assistance. By consent adjourned to 2.9.2015. Interim order to continue till next date.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.764 of 2015

______________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.9139/2015

20.08.2015

Mr.Haider Waheed, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Mr.Khadim Hussain, Advocate for defendant No.1

Khamran Mirza Mughal, authorized representative of

----

Khamran Mirza Mughal (present in person), authorized representative of EPZA has filed counter affidavit of each alleged contemnor. Copies of the same have been supplied to counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the defendant No.1 and the representative of EPZA categorically stated that they have not violated the interim orders. The aforesaid statement is taken on record. By consent adjourned to 1.9.2015. Interim order passed earlier to continue till next date.

JUDGE

Urgency granted. Both the learned counsel referred to the joint

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.238 of 2015

______________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For orders on CMA No.11840/2015

20.08.2015

Mr.Sarfraz Ali Metlo, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

Mr.Pervaiz A. Shams, Advocate for defendant No.1

----

Urgency granted. Both the learned counsel referred to the joint statement dated 18.8.2015 in which they have settled the modalities to resolve the issue and they request that the suit may be disposed of accordingly.

None present for the respondent Nos.2 to 6. Since the bone of contention in this matter is between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 and they have resolved the issue, therefore, the suit is disposed of in view of the joint statement and the suit against the defendant Nos.2 to 4 is dismissed as withdrawn.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Suit No.758 of 2010

______________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of CMA No.8875/2015

20.08.2015

Mr.Ali Asghar Buriro, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

None present for the defendant.

----

The plaintiff has filed this application with the request that the original documents exhibited by the plaintiff in the evidence may be returned back to him.

On the last date notice of this application was waived by learned counsel for the KMC but today he is called absent.

Judgment was passed in this case on 27.4.2015 and the decree was singed on 5.5.2015. The evidence file is also attached with this case which shows that some original documents were filed by the plaintiff along with his affidavit of exparte proof through his attorney Rahat Hussain Siddiqui. Since the suit has already been disposed of, the office may release the original documents to the plaintiff after proper verification and identification and keep photocopies thereof intact in the evidence file. The application is disposed of.

JUDGE

1. Granted.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. Through this bail application the applicants seek protective bail in FIR No.10/2014 Police Station A.C.E. Karachi under Section 420, 468 & 471/34 PPC read with 5(2) Act-II of 1947. Learned counsel submits that the incident took place in the year 2010 but the FIR was lodged on 17.4.2014. The plausible delay in lodging the FIR has not been explained by the complainant. Without de-touching and touching the merits of the cases the applicants are granted protective bail for ten days in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with P.R. Bond in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this court.

The applicants shall surrender themselves before the trial court on or before the expiry of ten days period from today whichever is earlier.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Cr.Bail No.752 of 2014

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on M.A.No.4098/2014

2.For orders on M.A.No.4099/2014

3.For hearing.

12.05.2014

Mr.Muhammad Azad Khan, Advocate for the applicant alongwith the applicant.

----

1. Granted.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. Learned counsel submits that the incident took place on 19.11.2013 and the FIR No.161/2014 was lodged on 29.3.2014 after more than four months delay for which no plausible explanation has been given by the complainant. The applicant was granted interim pre-arrest bail by the learned Sessions Judge Karachi South and the same was subsequently recalled by him.

Without de-touching and touching the merits of the case the applicant is admitted to interim pre-arrest bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this court.

The applicant is directed to appear before the trial court and file proof before this court on the next date of hearing. Issue notice to A.P.G.

To come up on 30.5.2014 for confirmation or otherwise.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Cr.Bail No.753 of 2014

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on M.A.No.4100/2014

2.For orders on M.A.No.4101/2014

3.For hearing.

12.05.2014

Mr.Muhammad Azad Khan, Advocate for the applicant alongwith the applicant.

----

1. Granted.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. Learned counsel submits that the incident took place on 1.10.2013 and the FIR No.05/2014 was lodged on 02.01.2014 after more than three months delay for which no plausible explanation has been given by the complainant. The applicant was granted interim pre-arrest bail by the learned Sessions Judge Karachi South and the same was subsequently recalled by him.

The applicant is directed to appear before the trial court and file proof before this court on the next date of hearing. Issue notice to A.P.G.

To come up on 30.5.2014 for confirmation or otherwise.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Cr.Bail No.754 of 2014

____________________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on M.A.No.4102/2014

2.For orders on M.A.No.4103/2014

3.For hearing.

12.05.2014

Mr.Muhammad Azad Khan, Advocate for the applicant alongwith the applicant.

----

1. Granted.

2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.

3. Learned counsel submits that the incident took place on 1.10.2013 and the FIR No.72/2014 was lodged on 07.02.2014 after more than four months delay for which no plausible explanation has been given by the complainant. The applicant was granted interim pre-arrest bail by the learned Sessions Judge Karachi South and the same was subsequently recalled by him.

The applicant is directed to appear before the trial court and file proof before this court on the next date of hearing. Issue notice to A.P.G.

To come up on 30.5.2014 for confirmation or otherwise.

JUDGE

The petitioner was issued a show cause notice under Standing Order 15(3) of West Pakistan Industrial & Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 and after inquiry he was dismissed from service. He challenged the dismissal order before the Fourth Labour Court at Karachi through grievance Petition No.169/2008. The grievance petition was allowed and the dismissal order was set aside. The petitioner was reinstated in service without back benefits.

Cross appeals were filed, the petitioner filed appeal for the non-grant of back benefits, while the management filed the appeal against the reinstatement order. Both the appeals were heard together and vide order dated 28.8.2012 the Labour Appellate Tribunal set-aside the order of the Labour Court and remanded the matter back to the Labour Court with the directions to decide the matter afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Counsel for the petitioner argued that in the impugned judgment the learned Tribunal has given finding on merits of the case which amounts to prejudice the case of the petitioner in the Labour Court after remand. He further argued that since show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under Standing Orders Ordinance, so he rightly approached to the Labour Court and the finding of the Tribunal that it was the case of unfair labour practice is totally a misconceived finding without application of mind.

On the contrary learned counsel for the respondent No.2 argued that this was not the only point but there are other points also which are mentioned in the order passed for remanding back the matter. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 argued that the effect of Standing Order 12(3) of the Ordinance, 1968 is also to be seen by the Labour Court whether the dismissal of the petitioner on account of misconduct amounts to industrial dispute or not.

After arguing at some length, the learned counsel for the parties agreed that this petition may be disposed of at Katcha Peshi stage. They further agreed that let this matter be decided by the learned Labour Court, but while deciding the case the learned Labour Court shall not be influenced with the finding of the Labour Appellate Tribunal so that proper and just order may be passed in accordance with law. By consent this petition is disposed of with the directions to the learned Labour Court to decide the grievance petition No.169 of 2008 within a period of one month, however it is clarified that while hearing the case the learned Labour Court shall apply its independent mind without being influenced by the finding of the labour appellant Tribunal and decide the case in accordance with law.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P.No.D-3063 of 2013

______________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on office objection.

2.For katcha peshi

3.For hearing of CMA No.21079/13

10.03.2014

Mr.Ahsan holding brief for Mr.Faisal Kamal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Abdul Jalil Zubedi, AAG

Mr.Abid Zuberi, Advocate for the respondent No.3

----

Mr.Ahsan holding brief for Mr.Faisal Kamal, Advocate for the petitioner seeks adjournment on the ground that the latter is busy before another bench. Mr.Abid Zuberi, Advocate for the respondent No.3 opposes the adjournment and argued that the interim order is operating in this case. As last chance adjourned to 25.3.2014 at 8:30 a.m. If on the next date Mr.Faisal Kamal, Advocate will fail to appear the injunction order will be vacated. Interim order to continue till next date.

JUDGE

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

J.M.No.08 of 2014

______________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on CMA No.2716/14

2.For orders on CMA No.2717/14

3.For orders on main application.

10.03.2014

Mr.Haider Waheed, Advocate for the applicants.

-----

1. Granted.

2-3. Learned counsel for the applicants has filed this Judicial Misc. Application under Section 12(2) CPC. It is alleged in the application that Execution Application No.09/2014 was filed by the plaintiff for the execution of decree passed in Suit No.1328/2011. The Execution Application No.9/2011 was fixed before another learned Single Judge of this court on 17.2.2014, on which date without notice to the J.Ds the execution application was allowed. Learned counsel submits that the order was obtained on misrepresentation and concealment of facts, as against the decree review application had already been filed in Suit No.1328/2011 and the attention of this court was not invited to the review application. Issue notice to the respondents for 17.3.2014 at 1:30 p.m. meanwhile, status quo to be maintained. Office is directed to tag R&Ps of Ex.No.09/2014 with this J.M.

JUDGE