1986 PLP 1665 (SCMR)
BANNU SUGAR MILLS Ltd. — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1665 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Kadir Shaikh, S.A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | BANNU SUGAR MILLS Ltd. — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1665 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1665 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Kadir Shaikh, S.A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1665 (SCMR) (BANNU SUGAR MILLS Ltd. — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Faizanul Haq, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- M.S. Ghoury, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 11th June, 1986.
- Faizanul Haq, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- M.S. Ghoury, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind, Karachi, dated 5-12-1985 in M.C.A. No. 88 of 1985).
Art. 185(3)--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), 'S.100 & O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2--Impugned judgment of High Court dismissing petitioner's application under O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2, Civil Procedure Code, passed for very valid and cogent reasons--Petitioner's appeal also dismissed by High Court for reasons unassailable and in valid exercise of discretionary jurisdiction which was not open to any exception--Leave refused.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of a Division Bench of Sind High Court by which an appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and in result the order passed by the learned Single Judge of that Court dismissing petitioner's application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, read with section 151 of the C . P. C . was upheld. By that applie8tion petitioner prayed that pending the final disposal of the suit filed by him the respondents be prohibited from, enchasing the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner. We find that the learned Single Judge in the High Court passed the impugned order dismissing petitioner's application for very valid and cogent reasons. Learned Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court have also dismissed petitioner's appeal for the reasons that are unassailable. Since the impugned judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court has been passed in valid exercise of discretionary jurisdiction, it is not open to any exception in law. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. M. Y. H. Petition dismissed.