1999 PLP 3303 (MLD)

Muhammad Muzaffarul Haq for Respondent No.

2. Date of hearing: 29th September, 1997. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23-5-1997 passed by the Incharge Senior Civil Judge, Kotri, directing maintenance of status quo in the matter. Brief facts of the case are that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 entered into an Agreement dated 15-5-1995, under which the former is supplying certain quantity of coal to the latter. This Agreement is valid upto 30th June, 1998 and is extendable on expiry. The respondent No. 2 under a separate arrangement for the supply of coal, delivered to the appellant the coal supplied for it by the respondent No. 1 The said arrangement between the respondent No. 2 and the appellant expired on 30-6-1997 and thereafter the appellants issued tender inviting quotations from the coal suppliers for the supply of coal. This alarmed the first respondent who filed suit in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kotri challenging appellants' action. Along with this suit an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, C. P. C. was also filed on which the impugned order was passed. The contention of the learned counsel for the first respondent is that the coal to be supplied to the second respondent under the aforesaid Agreement dated 15-5-1995 was meant for WAPDA and therefore WAPDA was not justified in inviting quotations for the supply of coal from other suppliers and that if it was allowed to do so it would adversely affect the interest of respondent No. 1 and would result in breach of its agreement with respondent No.

2. I had heard the counsel for the parties earlier at Hyderabad cid had directed that the representatives of the appellants and the concerned respondents be present in Court. They are present today. Mr. Bashir Ahmed Ansari, Managing Director of respondent No. 2 states that the issuance of tender by the appellant would not affect the said Agreement between the respondent No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 and that not withstanding appellants' action of inviting bids, as aforesaid, the respondent No. 2 would continue to accept the quantity of coal as provided under the said Agreement, during its validity, on the terms and conditions contained therein. This statement of the Managing Director of the second respondent satisfies Mr. A Jhamat Jethanand and Mr. Muhammad Jamil, Managing Director of respondent No.

1. Accordingly, by consent of the parties present and their counsel, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal is disposed of, with no orders as to costs, in terms of the statement made by Mr. Bashir Ansari, Managing Director of respondent No.

2. Consequently, C. M. A. No. 193 of 1997 has become infructuous and is dismissed. Q.M.H./M.A.K./W.20/K Application dismissed.