2006 PLP 1139 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD ASIF DAR — Plaintiff Versus UNIVERSAL LEASING CORPORATION LIMITED through Chief Executive — Defendant
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1139 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASIF DAR — Plaintiff Versus UNIVERSAL LEASING CORPORATION LIMITED through Chief Executive — Defendant |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1139 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1139 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1139 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD ASIF DAR — Plaintiff Versus UNIVERSAL LEASING CORPORATION LIMITED through Chief Executive — Defendant). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
O. VI, R.2
Suit for recovery of money against defendant-Company, being amount of unpaid salaries and allowances of the plaintiff as well as claim for damages
Plaintiff, who was employed as Executive Director of a company and had no concern or involvement in any alleged fraudulent transaction by the company, was arrested and since his arrest he was not paid his salary and allowances and even the company maintained car was repossessed by the Institution from which the same was obtained on lease for the plaintiff on account of failure of the company to pay monthly lease rentals to the lessor
Plaintiff had contended that his wrongful involvement in the fraud case was quite humiliating for him and his family, hence his claim for damages
Plaintiff had proved through documents that defendant-Company had not accounted for his salaries and allowances for the relevant period
Defendant had failed to refute the plaintiff's case
Plaintiff, in circumstances, was entitled to his claim with regard to unpaid salaries, allowances and tax deductions
Plaintiff's claim for damages was also reasonable considering the humiliation and embarrassment that he had to suffer on account of his arrest, detention and trial for no fault on his part
High Court decreed the suit in a sum of Rs.42,50,598 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum chargeable from the date of filing of the suit till realization of the decretal amount.
Judgment & Decree
FAISAL ARAB, J.
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.42,50,598 being amount of unpaid salaries and allowances of the plaintiff as well as a claim for damages. In October, 2000, the plaintiff was appointed by the defendant as its working Director at a gross salary of Rs.71,850 per month. He was also entitled to utilities allowance at the rate of Rs.6,500 per month as well a company maintained car. The service of the plaintiff was terminable on one month's notice by either side or one month's salary in lieu of such notice. On 28-2-2002, NAB arrested the plaintiff. He was then produced before the Accountability Court on 1-3-2002 in Reference No.16 of 2002. The Reference related to cases of forgery allegedly committed by several companies including the defendant-Company, which deprived EOBI, FIB's worth Rs.1.04 billion. The aforesaid Reference was subsequently transferred to Karachi and was renumbered as Reference No.20 of 2002. The reason for plaintiff's involvement in the above Reference was on account of NAB's investigation into the financial affairs of the two major share-holders of the defendant, namely Interworld Securities Ltd. and Republic Securities Ltd., and that the plaintiff was Executive Director of the defendant. The case of the plaintiff before the Accountability Court was that he was merely an employee of the defendant-Company designated as Executive Director and had no concern or involvement in any fraudulent transaction. The case of the plaintiff is that since his arrest he was not paid his salary and allowances and even the Company maintained car was repossessed on 17-3-2002 by Askari Leasing Ltd., the institution from which the car was obtained on lease for the plaintiff on account of failure of the defendant to pay monthly lease rentals to the lessor. It is also the case of the plaintiff that his wrongful involvement in NAB case was quite humiliating for him and his family members. Disgusted with all this, the plaintiff vide letter, dated 6-9-2003 resigned from the directorship of the defendant with immediate effect and demanded salaries and allowances with effect from 1-3-2002. Vide letter, dated 25-10-2003, the plaintiff also asked the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.42,673, to the Tax Authorities on account of the short payment of advance tax deductible by the defendant from plaintiff's salary for the Income Tax assessment year 2001-2002. Failure of the plaintiff to make payment as aforesaid led to the filing of the present suit. After service of notice, the defendant filed its written statement. However, vide order, dated 15-8-2005 this Court called upon the parties for-examination under the provisions of Order X, C.P.C. On 3-10-2005 the defence of the defendant was struck off on account of its counsel's failure to answer the queries under Order X, C.P.C. Thereafter on 28-11-2005 the matter was fixed for final disposal. On 26-1-2006 plaintiff filed his affidavit in ex parte proof and produced several documents. The plaintiff's affidavit in ex parte proof remained unrebutted. The plaintiff produced documents such as annual reports and Form "A" returns. In the Annual Report of the year 2003 filed as Annexure "P/5/21" it is clearly mentioned that defendant has not accounted for salaries and allowances of the plaintiff. On account of the failure of the defendant to refute plaintiff's case, the plaintiff is entitled to his claim with regard to unpaid salaries, allowances and tax deductions. The plaintiff's claim for damages is also reasonable considering the humiliation and embarrassment that he had to suffer on account of his arrest, detention and trial before NAB Court for no fault of his own. This suit is therefore, decreed in a sum of Rs.42,50,598 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum chargeable from the date of filing of the suit till realization of the decretal amount. Costs shall follow the event. M.B.A./M-65/K????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Suit decreed.