2010 PLP 331 (GBLR)
CLIC — Petitioner Versus PAK. CHINA C&MC. (PVT.) LTD. — Respondent
| Citation | 2010 PLP 331 (GBLR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Appellate Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqoob, J |
| Parties | CLIC — Petitioner Versus PAK. CHINA C&MC. (PVT.) LTD. — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 331 (GBLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 331 (GBLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Appellate Court bench comprising: Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqoob, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 331 (GBLR) (CLIC — Petitioner Versus PAK. CHINA C&MC. (PVT.) LTD. — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Shafi Senior Advocate for Petitioner.
- Amjad Hussain Advocate Chief Court with special permission.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 60(13)
Order passed by the Chief Court for furnishing bank guarantee had not been complied with and in consequence Trial Judge attached 10% retention amount of the bond deposited by the petitioner with the department
Counsel for the respondent placing copy of that order on record had submitted that petition could be dismissed
Counsel for the petitioner conceding the order passed by the Trial Court, submitted that he would not further press the petition, rather would avail the remedy in due course of time
Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed as not pressed.
Judgment & Decree
During the course of arguments we have been informed that the order dated 4-5-2009 passed by the Chief Court for furnishing the bank guarantee has not been complied with and in consequence thereto learned trial Judge vide order dated 26-11-2002 attached 10% retention amount of the bond deposited by the petitioner with the department with direction to PD/Executive Engineer not to release 10% retention amount till disposal of the suit. Learned counsel for the respondent placing copy of this order on record has submitted that this petition may be dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner conceding the order passed by the trial Court submitted that he would not further press this petition before this Court rather will avail the remedy against the order dated 26-12-2009 in due course of time. This petition is accordingly dismissed as not pressed. H.B.T./95/Glt.????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Petition dismissed.