MLD 1988

1988 PLP 310 (MLD)

GULISTAN TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED‑‑Plaintiff Versus BASIT BILLA COTTON INDUSTRIES LIMITED and another‑‑Defendants

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Suit No. 438 of 1986, decided on 16th February, 1988.
Honorable Judges
Haider Ali Pirzada, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1988 PLP 310 (MLD)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Haider Ali Pirzada, J
Parties GULISTAN TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED‑‑Plaintiff Versus BASIT BILLA COTTON INDUSTRIES LIMITED and another‑‑Defendants
Primary Law Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 310 (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 1988 PLP 310 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Haider Ali Pirzada, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 310 (MLD) (GULISTAN TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED‑‑Plaintiff Versus BASIT BILLA COTTON INDUSTRIES LIMITED and another‑‑Defendants). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑

Representation

  • Date of hearing‑ 16th August, 1988.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑O. XXXVII, R. 2‑‑Suit for recovery of amount on basis of promissory note‑‑ Plaintiff filing recovery suit against defendants contending that defendants had agreed to pay to plaintiff suit amount and in confirmation of that settlement had signed and delivered to plaintiff letter wherein liability of said amount was admitted and acknowledged and they had unconditionally agreed to pay said amount to plaintiff‑‑Plaintiff also alleged that defendants signed and delivered to plaintiff demand promissory note for aforesaid amount‑‑Defendants issued cheque to plaintiff for payment of disputed amount, but same was dishonoured‑ Plaint filed by plaintiff being on oath and having not been denied by any of defendants, same would entitle it to decree as against defendants jointly and severally for suit amount with interest and costs. H.A. Rehman for Plaintiff.

Judgment & Decree

‑‑‑O. XXXVII, R. 2‑‑Suit for recovery of amount on basis of promissory note‑‑ Plaintiff filing recovery suit against defendants contending that defendants had agreed to pay to plaintiff suit amount and in confirmation of that settlement had signed and delivered to plaintiff letter wherein liability of said amount was admitted and acknowledged and they had unconditionally agreed to pay said amount to plaintiff‑‑Plaintiff also alleged that defendants signed and delivered to plaintiff demand promissory note for aforesaid amount‑‑Defendants issued cheque to plaintiff for payment of disputed amount, but same was dishonoured‑ Plaint filed by plaintiff being on oath and having not been denied by any of defendants, same would entitle it to decree as against defendants jointly and severally for suit amount with interest and costs. H.A. Rehman for Plaintiff. Date of hearing‑ 16th August, 1988. The present suit has been filed on 6‑5‑1986 by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 1,99,855 with interest and costs against the two defendants. It is alleged m the plaint that the plaintiff paid to Fazal Oil Mills Limited Sadiqabad, on or about 4th August, 1984, the sum of Rs. 2,00,000 for the purchase of cotton. At that time the defendant No. 2 was the Managing Director of the said Mills. It is further alleged that after adjustments the amount of Rs. 1,87,555.62 was mutually found due and payable by the said Mills to the plaintiff, at the relevant time. It is alleged that pursuant to the mutual settlement made between the defendants and the said Fazal Oil Mills Limited, and in consideration thereof, the defendants agreed to pay to the plaintiff the aforesaid amount of Rs. 1,87,555.62, and in confirmation of the said settlement, the defendant No. 2 signed and delivered to the plaintiff letter, dated 12th October, 1985 wherein the liability of the said amount was admitted and acknowledged and he unconditionally agreed or confirmed to pay the said amount to the plaintiff. It is further alleged that the defendant No. 2 also signed and delivered to the plaintiff the demand promissory note, dated 12th October, 1985, for the aforesaid amount. The learned counsel has placed before me original demand promissory note. It is also alleged that the defendant issued cheque bearing No. 75114 dated 30‑11‑1985 drawn on Allied Bank of Pakistan Limited, Pakistan Chowk Branch, which was dishonoured. The plaintiff has also placed before me cheque original and the memorandum issued by the Bank. The plaintiff finally served legal notice dated 18th February, 1986, but the defendants failed and neglected to pay the amount. The plaint is on oath and has not been denied by any of the defendants. The plaintiff is entitled to a decree as against the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 jointly and severally in the sum of Rs. 1,99,855 with interest 16 per cent per annum from the date of the filing of the suit till realization. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to costs against the defendants. H.B.T./G‑75/K Suit decreed with costs.