2010 PLP 218 (MLD)
SAFDAR NOOR COTTON GINNING AND PRESSING FACTORY — Petitioner Versus GHULAM MUSTAFA — Respondent
| Citation | 2010 PLP 218 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SAFDAR NOOR COTTON GINNING AND PRESSING FACTORY — Petitioner Versus GHULAM MUSTAFA — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 218 (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 2010 PLP 218 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 218 (MLD) (SAFDAR NOOR COTTON GINNING AND PRESSING FACTORY — Petitioner Versus GHULAM MUSTAFA — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Javed Akhtar Wains for Petitioner.
- Messrs Haniayoun Syed Rasool and Malik M. Usman Bhatti for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
O. XXXVII, Rr.2, 3, O.XXI, Rr.10 & 30
West Pakistan Relief of Indebtedness Ordinance (XV of 1960), Ss.2 & 11-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Suit for recovery of amount on basis of cheques
Suit having been decreed, plaintiff/decree-holder filed execution petition
Defendant/ judgment-debtor submitted application for making instalments of the decretal amount
Said application by the defendant was accepted by the Executing Court with the condition that defendant would pay Rs.50,000 till next date of hearing; and that if defendant would fail to pay said amount accordingly, application submitted by the defendant for instalment of the decretal amount would be deemed to be dismissed
Executing Court dismissed application of defendant due to non-compliance of order of the Executing Court and issued warrant of arrest of the defendant, who had filed constitutional petition
Defendant/judgment-debtor was trying to take shelter under the West Pakistan Relief of Indebtedness Ordinance, 1960, according to S.2(b) of said Ordinance, the debt would not include the debts incurred for the purpose of trade
Impugned judgment had revealed that parties had common, business and loan was advanced in connection with said trade
Defendant, in circumstances, could not claim benefit of the provisions of West Pakistan Relief of Indebtedness Ordinance, 1960
Constitutional petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
ARSHAD MAHMOOD, J.
Through this constitutional petition Safdar Noor Cotton Ginning and Pressing Factory Kehrore Pacca seeks setting aside of orders, dated 9-3-2007 and 14-3-2007 passed by the learned executing Court.
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent instituted a suit or recovery of Rs.1,50,000 (rupees one lac fifty thousand only) on the basis of cheques against the petitioner under Order XXXVII Rule 2, C.P.C. before the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Kehrore Pacca, District Lodhran which was decreed against the petitioner ex parte vide judgment and decree, dated 15-10-2004. Application of the petitioner seeking setting aside of ex parte decree was dismissed. The respondent filed execution petition. Petitioner submitted an application for making the installments of the decretal amount. Vide order, dated 9-3-2007 the learned executing Court accepted the application for instalment of decretal amount with the condition that the petitioner shall pay Rs.50,000 rupees fifty thousand only) till next date of hearing i.e. 13-3-2007 and if he fails to pay the same then the application filed by the petitioner for instalment of the decretal amount shall be deemed to be dismissed and due to non-deposit of Rs.50,000 the learned executing Court dismissed the application of the petitioner and issued warrant of arrest of the petitioner and his surety vide order, dated 14-3-2007. Hence this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this petition submits that the impugned orders are against law, facts and merits of the case. Learned counsel argued with vehemence that according to section 11 of the West Pakistan Relief of Indebtedness Ordinance, 1960 the learned Executing Court was under obligation to pass an order that the decretal amount shall be paid in such number of instalments and on such date and subject to such conditions as being according to the circumstances of the judgment debtor and the amount of decree.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand have opposed this petition and supported the impugned orders.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.
6. Petitioner factory is trying to take shelter under the West Pakistan Relief of Indebtedness Ordinance, 1960. According to the definition of debt as provided in section 2 clause (b) of the Ordinance, 1960, the debt does not include the debts incurred for the purposes of trade. Perusal of the impugned judgment reveals that partiers had common business of cotton, therefore, the loan was advanced in connection with trade. Thus the petitioner cannot claim benefit of the provisions of the Ordinance, 1960. Resultantly this petition has no force and is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./S-261/L Petition dismissed.