1995SCMR1221 (PLP)
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY‑‑‑Petitioner Versus M/s. DAEWOO CORPORATION‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1995SCMR1221 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sajjad Ali Shah, CJ and Irshad Hasan Khan, J |
| Parties | NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY‑‑‑Petitioner Versus M/s. DAEWOO CORPORATION‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Arbitration Act (X of 1940)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995SCMR1221 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Arbitration Act (X of 1940)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995SCMR1221 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sajjad Ali Shah, CJ and Irshad Hasan Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995SCMR1221 (PLP) (NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY‑‑‑Petitioner Versus M/s. DAEWOO CORPORATION‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- K.MA. Samdani, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- S.M. War, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Imtiaz M. Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 7th March, 1995.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 21‑12‑1994 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in C.R.No.548/94). ‑‑‑‑S. 33‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Court by consent of parties directed that question whether Arbitrator should be summoned or not should be decided by Trial Court after recording evidence if any, after hearing parties‑‑‑Impugned order of High Court was maintained with deletion of specific para. in operative part with regard to summoning of Arbitrator and imposing condition therefore‑‑‑Observation in the order of Trial Court to the effect that application filed by respondent under S.33, Arbitration Act, 1940, was accepted would be deemed to be deleted‑‑ Petition for leave to appeal was disposed of as per terms of agreement between parties.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 33‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Court by consent of parties directed that question whether Arbitrator should be summoned or not should be decided by Trial Court after recording evidence if any, after hearing parties‑‑‑Impugned order of High Court was maintained with deletion of specific para. in operative part with regard to summoning of Arbitrator and imposing condition therefore‑‑‑Observation in the order of Trial Court to the effect that application filed by respondent under S.33, Arbitration Act, 1940, was accepted would be deemed to be deleted‑‑ Petition for leave to appeal was disposed of as per terms of agreement between parties. K.MA. Samdani, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. S.M. War, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Imtiaz M. Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent. Date of hearing: 7th March, 1995. By consent of the learned counsel appearing before us for both the parties it is hereby directed that the question whether the Arbitrator should be summoned or not is to be decided by the trial Court after recording evidence if any and after hearing the parties in this matter. In consequence, order, dated 21st December, 1994 passed by the High Court and impugned in this petition is hereby upheld with deletion of paragraph 3 in the operative part with regard to the summoning of the Arbitrator and imposing condition therefore.
2. Likewise, in the order, dated 31st July, 1994 of the trial Court the application filed by the respondent under 1940 is accepted is to be deemed as deleted.
3. The petition is disposed of in the terms stated above. A.A./N‑419/S Order accordingly.