1989 PLP 4367 (MLD)
AKBAR HUSSAIN — Plaintiff Versus Wadero MUHAMMAD TAYYAB — Defendant
| Citation | 1989 PLP 4367 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Mazhar Ali, J |
| Parties | AKBAR HUSSAIN — Plaintiff Versus Wadero MUHAMMAD TAYYAB — Defendant |
| Primary Law | Arbitration Act (X of 1940) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 4367 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Arbitration Act (X of 1940) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 4367 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Muhammad Mazhar Ali, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 4367 (MLD) (AKBAR HUSSAIN — Plaintiff Versus Wadero MUHAMMAD TAYYAB — Defendant). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S.14(2)--Objection to award--Notice of award, filed in Court, served on parties for appearance--Registrar of Court allowed time to file objections, if any, and also extended time further on application of defendant and adjourned case- Objections filed by defendant were patently out of time--Defendant was unable to show sufficient cause for not filing objections in time--Objections were overruled as time-barred and award made rule of Court. Dewan Bashir for Plaintiff. Nemo for Defendant.
Judgment & Decree
Dewan Bashir for Plaintiff. Nemo for Defendant. It is 12 noon now. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that objections are liable to be dismissed for having been filed beyond time. The notice of Award filed on 2nd of January, 1988 was issued on 6th January, 1988 for appearance of the parties for filing of application under section 15, 16 or 30, as the case may be, of the Arbitration Act, 1940, on or before Ist February, 1988.The service was held good on 1st February, 1988. The Registrar allowed time to file objections, if any, by Ist March, 1988. The defendant presented an application under section 148 Cr.P.C. for enlargement of time by two weeks which was allowed by the Registrar on Ist March, 1988. Case was then adjourned to 21st March, 1988. The defendant filed objections to the Award on 21st March, 1988 A which are patently out of time. No application for condonation of delay or enlargement of time has been made alongwith objections filed on behalf of the defendant. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, objections are overruled as time-barred. At this stage, Mr. Mumtaz Ahmad Shaikh, Advocate for the defendant appears. It may be noted that he had not sent any intimation that he was busy before another Bench. There is yet another Award given in J.M.No.39/86 by the same Arbitator who has given the Award in the case in hand and that he has tiled objections in that case also against the Award and that case is fixed today before my learned brother Syed Abdul Rehman, J. The learned counsel, however, was unable to make any submission with regard to the objections filed in this case beyond time. I have already held that merits of the case cannot be taken into consideration at this stage when the objections filed on behalf of the defendant are time-barred. Even now the counsel could not show any sufficient cause for not filing the objections in time. The Award is made the rule of the Court. M.Y.H./A-612/K Award made rule of Court.