1999CLC2010 (PLP)
Messrs ERASMUS MARINE COMPANY LTD. ‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN
| Citation | 1999CLC2010 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Mrs. Majida Razvi, J. |
| Parties | Messrs ERASMUS MARINE COMPANY LTD. ‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN |
| Primary Law | Haidry Construction Company Ltd. V. B.C.C.I (Overseas) Limited 199991 C L C 149 ref., Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999CLC2010 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Haidry Construction Company Ltd. V. B.C.C.I (Overseas) Limited 199991 C L C 149 ref., Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999CLC2010 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Mrs. Majida Razvi, J..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999CLC2010 (PLP) (Messrs ERASMUS MARINE COMPANY LTD. ‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 13‑‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), OXXXIX, Rr.1 & 2‑‑ Application for interim injunction‑‑‑Bank draft‑‑‑Bank had been restrained from making any payment from the petitioner's account‑‑‑Such order of restraint was issued and served upon the Bank when it had already issued the Bank draft‑‑ Bank draft, however, was encashed subsequently, after issuing the said order‑‑ Held, Bank draft, having its own sanctity once delivered to a party amounted to payment of that amount from the issuing Bank‑‑‑Application for grant of interim injunction was dismissed having become infructuous. Muhammad Naeem for Plaintiff. Rizwan Ahmad Siddiqui for Defendant No.2
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Naeem for Plaintiff. Rizwan Ahmad Siddiqui for Defendant No.2 C.M.A. No.311 of 1996 is an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. read with section 151, C.P.C. praying to restrain the defendant No.l from recovering and defendant No.2 from paying any amount of claim for the alleged short landing of cargo under Bank Guarantee, dated 27‑11‑1995 furnished by defendant No.2. Mr. Rizwan Siddiqui states that the suit was filed on 18‑1‑1996 and toe stay application was put up on 21‑1‑1996 and the order was served on the defendant No.2 at about 4‑30 p.m. on the same day. According to him the Bank received a letter, dated 24‑1‑1996 for encashment of the Bank Guarantee and since this was an unconditional Bank Guarantee, the Bank prepared a pay order on 18‑1‑1996 and the same was delivered to the Government on the same date. He submits that once the pay order was handed over, the Bank was absolved from its duty and it was encashed by the State Bank of Pakistan on 30‑1‑1996. According to him once the pay order is issued the payment cannot be stopped. He has relied on the case of Haidry Construction Company Ltd. v. B.C.C.I. (Overseas) Limited 1991 CLC 149 wherein the learned Judge has observed that "a bank draft once delivered to a party amounts to payment of that particular amount from the issuing bank. Such draft has its own sanctity and according to banking practice was treated as cash payment or equivalent to payment". According to the learned counsel, in the light of the above judgment and the law, the Bank having once issued the pay order could not stop the payment of the same. In view of the submissions of the learned counsel and the fact that the amount has already been paid, subject to the rights of the plaintiff this application having become infructuous, is dismissed.
2. Notice to the defendants as well as the contemner for a date in office.
3. The alleged contemner has furnished an unconditional apology which is accepted and the said alleged contemner is released from the contempt proceedings. Q.M.H./M.A.K./E‑8/K Order accordingly.