1991 PLP 1801 (SCMR)
TOYO MONKA KAISHA LTD. — Petitioner Versus FERRO ALLOYS PAKISTAN LIMITED and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1801 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ and Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, J |
| Parties | TOYO MONKA KAISHA LTD. — Petitioner Versus FERRO ALLOYS PAKISTAN LIMITED and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1801 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1801 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ and Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1801 (SCMR) (TOYO MONKA KAISHA LTD. — Petitioner Versus FERRO ALLOYS PAKISTAN LIMITED and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hamid Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- MA. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Respondent No.2.
- Date of hearing: 15th April, 1990.
- Hamid Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- MA. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Respondent No.2.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgments dated 9-12-1987 and 25-1-1988 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in FA.O. No. 95 of 1987 and Civil Revision No. 2021/87, respectively).
Art. 185(3)
Appeal against the same judgment which was impugned in present case filed on behalf of respondents was pending before Supreme Court
Supreme Court, after hearing counsel considered it fit and proper to grant leave to appeal in present case also amongst others to explore possibility of passing an agreed order in both appeals.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ.‑‑‑Learned counsel states that an appeal, against the same judgment which is impugned in this case filed on behalf of other party, is pending in this Court. It is Civil Appeal No.3 of 1988. After hearing the learned counsel we consider it fit and proper to grant leave to appeal in this case also amongst others to explore the possibility of passing an agreed order in both the appeals. Security Rs.5,000, in each case. The appeals shall be prepared on present record with direction to the parties to file all those documents which shall be necessary for disposal thereof. Both the appeals shall be heard with the said Appeal No.3 of 1988. AA./T‑72/S Leave granted.