1981 PLP 1500 (CLC)
R. M. GULISTAN‑Petitioner Versus XARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION‑Respondent
| Citation | 1981 PLP 1500 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | R. M. GULISTAN‑Petitioner Versus XARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP 1500 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP 1500 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP 1500 (CLC) (R. M. GULISTAN‑Petitioner Versus XARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
O. VI, r. 6‑Service of notice‑Presumption‑‑‑Defendant contending
no statutory notice having been served upon it before filing of suit and so plaintiff not entitled to costs or interest‑Defendant not raising any such plea in written statement‑‑Held : Non‑service of notice cannot be presumed in circumstances.‑[Pleadings].
Judgment & Decree
Suit No. 174 of 1978, decided of 23rd September, 1979. (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑
‑‑‑‑ O. XII, r. 6‑Decree on admission awarded building contract by defendant for a lump sum‑Plaintiff making claim for escalation of prices during execution of work‑Defendant paying certain amounts to plaintiff towards their claim for escalation oil basis of recommendation of a Committee‑‑On objection by Assistant Direc tor Local Fund Audit. defendant deducting price of cement supplied by defendant from gross bill and granting escalation on net amount instead of gross amount of running bills‑Controlling Authority directing plaintiff to be paid escalation on gross amounts of running bills prior to a certain date‑Defendant paying escalation on gross amounts of running bills‑Plaintiff contending such conduct of defendant itself constituted admission on its part‑Held, admission cannot be spelt out on basis of interpretation given various departments to rule and whether plaintiff entitled to receive escalation on gross amounts of running bills or on net amounts, an issue to be decided at trial of suit. ‑[Admission]. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑
O. VI, r. 6‑Service of notice‑Presumption‑‑‑Defendant contending
no statutory notice having been served upon it before filing of suit and so plaintiff not entitled to costs or interest‑Defendant not raising any such plea in written statement‑‑Held : Non‑service of notice cannot be presumed in circumstances.‑[Pleadings]. Muhammad Ali Sayeed for Plaintiff. Muslim Naqvi for Defendants.