2002 PLP 1714 (MLD)
KHAN DIL KHAN CONTRACTOR‑‑‑Applicant Versus KARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1714 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | S.A. Sarwana, J. |
| Parties | KHAN DIL KHAN CONTRACTOR‑‑‑Applicant Versus KARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION and others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1714 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1714 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: S.A. Sarwana, J..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1714 (MLD) (KHAN DIL KHAN CONTRACTOR‑‑‑Applicant Versus KARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Manzoor Ahmed.Khan for Respondents Nos. l to 3.
- Siddiq Mirza for Respondent No.4.
Headnotes / Summary
Licence‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑ Termination of licence‑‑‑Order terminating licence to collect parking fee had been challenged by licensee‑‑‑Agreement whereby licence was granted to the licensee had option to terminate contract at any time on written notice of three days in event of failure of licensee to fulfil any condition under agreement‑‑‑Licensee was alleged to have charged Parking Fee at higher rates than was agreed by agreement‑‑Authority, in circumstances, was justified in terminating licence granted to licensee‑‑‑Licence could be revoked by a grantor unless it was coupled with transfer of property and such transfer was in force or licensee acting upon licence had executed work of a permanent character and incurred expenses in execution‑‑‑Such being not the position in the present case licence was rightly terminated by Authority. Mahmood Habibullah for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
Applicant/plaintiff who was granted licence by KMC to collect Parking Fee on Hill Park for the Financial Year 1999‑2000 (ending on 30th June, 2000) by Agreement dated 10‑7‑1999 filed Suit No.416 of 2000 in the Court of IVth Senior Civil Judge, Karachi East requesting the Court to declare that the Order dated 12‑5‑2000 issued by KMC terminating the licence was illegal and unlawful. Interim stay was granted; however, the Interlocutory Application was dismissed on 22‑5‑2000. The applicant filed an appeal which was also dismissed on 27‑5‑2000 by the Additional District Judge, Karachi East. Hence this Revision. It is an admitted position that under clause (12) of the Agreement KMC has the option to terminate the contract at any time on written notice of three days in the event of the failure of the licence to fulfil any conditions under the Agreement. The applicant in his letter, dated 24‑1‑2000 addressed to KMC had admitted that his employees had F charged Parking Fee at higher rates than was agreed while he had gone to Punjab to celebrate Eid. In view of the admission by the applicant KMC was justified in terminating the licence. It is well‑settled that the licence may be revoked by a grantor unless it is coupled with transfer of property and such transfer is in force or the licensee acting upon the licence has executed work of a permanent character and incurred expenses in the execution.' This is not the position in the present case. In the circumstances both the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court were justified in dismissing the application for temporary injunction. The applicant has failed to show that the two lower Courts exercised their jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity requiring interference by the High Court. This Revision Application as well as the Interlocutory Application are misconceived and are accordingly dismissed with costs throughout. H.B.T./D‑31/K Revision dismissed.