MLD 1989

1989 PLP 4583 (MLD)

Messrs FIESTAL GRAINS (Pvt.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Constitutional Petition No. 366 of 1987, decided on 28th October, 1987.
Honorable Judges
Ajmal Mian and Mamoon Kazi, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 PLP 4583 (MLD)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Ajmal Mian and Mamoon Kazi, JJ
Parties Messrs FIESTAL GRAINS (Pvt.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents
Primary Law Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 4583 (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 1989 PLP 4583 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Mamoon Kazi, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 4583 (MLD) (Messrs FIESTAL GRAINS (Pvt.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Representation

  • Mrs. Ismat Mehdi for Petitioner.
  • S.M. Noorul Hassan for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

OXXXIX, Rr.1 & 2--Customs Act (IV of 1969), S.202(1)(b)--Temporary injunction--Importer allegedly obtained release of goods on basis of forged paid -up challan--Department contended that it was entitled to withhold possession of goods for amount which had been determined in adjudication proceedings- Importer praying for ad interim injunction, could get orders set aside by filing competent proceedings--Application for grant of ad interim injunction by importer was dismissed in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

AJMAL MIAN, J.--Mr. S.M. Noorul Hassan has placed on record six adjudication orders passed against the petitioner, in which it has been held that the petitioner have allegedly obtained the release of the goods on the basis of the alleged forged paid-up challans and, therefore, it has been contended that in terms of clause (b) of subsection (1) of Section 202 of the Customs Act, 1969, the respondents are entitled to withhold the possession of the goods for the amounts which have been adjudicated upon in these orders. We are not inclined to grant the ad in interim order. The petitioners will have to get the above orders set aside by filing competent proceedings. The application is therefore dismissed. However, we would order that the petition may be fixed for regular hearing within 6 months. M.Y.H./F-94/K. Petition dismissed.