CLC 1981

1981 PLP 615 (CLC)

MESSRS HAJI M. ZAKARIA & Co.‑Appellant Versus THE PROVINCE OF SIND‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Letters Patent Appeal No. 174 of 1970, decided on 5th January, 1980.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Hayee Kureshi and Sajjad Ali Shah, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1981 PLP 615 (CLC)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Abdul Hayee Kureshi and Sajjad Ali Shah, JJ
Parties MESSRS HAJI M. ZAKARIA & Co.‑Appellant Versus THE PROVINCE OF SIND‑Respondent
Primary Law (b) Evidence Act (I of 1872)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP 615 (CLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: (b) Evidence Act (I of 1872) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP 615 (CLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Abdul Hayee Kureshi and Sajjad Ali Shah, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP 615 (CLC) (MESSRS HAJI M. ZAKARIA & Co.‑Appellant Versus THE PROVINCE OF SIND‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(b) Evidence Act (I of 1872)

Representation

  • Ali Ahmed Fazeel for Appellant.
  • Usman Ghani A. Rashid, A.‑G. (Sind) for Respondent.
  • Date of hearing : 20th November, 1979.

Headnotes / Summary

(a) Contract Act (IX of 1872)‑ _‑‑‑‑ S. 73 read with Sale of Goods Act (Ill of 1930), S. 56‑Damages Measure of‑Appellants entering into agreement with respondents to buy goods for export to foreign country‑Appellants neglecting to accept and pay for major portion of goods‑Difference between export price at time of breach of contract and contract price, held, formula applicable for determining quantum of damages. [Damages]. ‑ S. 60‑Telegram‑Admissibility‑Sender of telegram not examined in Court‑Contents of telegram, held, not proved and telegram in admissible in evidence. (c) Evidence Act (I of 1872)‑ S.

60‑NewspaperAdmissibility‑Mere production of newspaper without examining any witness, held, does not prove contents of newspaper and copy of newspaper rightly rejected to be admitted in evidence.

Judgment & Decree

_‑‑‑‑ S. 73 read with Sale of Goods Act (Ill of 1930), S. 56‑Damages Measure of‑Appellants entering into agreement with respondents to buy goods for export to foreign country‑Appellants neglecting to accept and pay for major portion of goods‑Difference between export price at time of breach of contract and contract price, held, formula applicable for determining quantum of damages. [Damages]. (b) Evidence Act (I of 1872)

‑ S. 60‑Telegram‑Admissibility‑Sender of telegram not examined in Court‑Contents of telegram, held, not proved and telegram in admissible in evidence. (c) Evidence Act (I of 1872)‑ S.

60‑NewspaperAdmissibility‑Mere production of newspaper without examining any witness, held, does not prove contents of newspaper and copy of newspaper rightly rejected to be admitted in evidence. Ali Ahmed Fazeel for Appellant. Usman Ghani A. Rashid, A.‑G. (Sind) for Respondent. Date of hearing : 20th November, 1979.