1986 PLP 1454 (MLD)
THE TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF KARACHI‑‑Plaintiff Versus MARATHON SHIPPING AND
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1454 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Z. A. Ghani, J |
| Parties | THE TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF KARACHI‑‑Plaintiff Versus MARATHON SHIPPING AND |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1454 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1454 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Z. A. Ghani, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1454 (MLD) (THE TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF KARACHI‑‑Plaintiff Versus MARATHON SHIPPING AND). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Date of hearing: 23rd January, 1986.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑O.IX, R'.6‑‑Ex parte decree‑‑Defendant remaining absent though served with summons‑‑Ex parte decree‑‑Proof of averments in plaint‑ Recovery of amount‑‑Liability of defendant to pay claimed amount having been proved by affidavit and document recovery suit of plaintiff was decreed ex parte with costs in circumstances. Muhammad Shaiq Usmani for Plaintiff. Defendant (absent).
Judgment & Decree
Rs. 31,281.20 3 Dynamics " " Rs. 48,351.00 4 Captain Milos " " Rs.48,985.80 5 Green Sky " " Rs.244,929.72 6 Herms a Hellarra " " Rs. 77,663.50 Total Rs. 452,389.22 The claim made by the plaintiff is supported by documentary evidence and the averments made in the plaint on oath, which have remained unrebutted. The plaintiff has also filed affidavit in ex parte proof of one Mr. Rahis Taqi, who is Assistant in the Chief Account's Officer's Department. The defendant has been called absent though served with the summons. The suit accordingly has proceeded against it ex parte as provided under Order IX, rule 6, C.P.C (as amended). Being satisfied on the facts stated in the plaint, the affidavit) filed in ex parte proof and the documentary evidence produced, that the defendant is liable to pay Rs. 4,52,389.22 to the plaintiff, the suit is decreed for the said amount as claimed in the suit with costs. The plaintiff has claimed interest at the rate of 15% per annum. However, finding that the interest claimed is on the higher side, I direct that the defendant shall pay interest to the plaintiff on the decretal amount at the rate of 12 per annum from the date of filing of the suit till payment. H.B.T. Suit decreed.