1985 PLP 108 (MLD)
REHMAT ALI and another — Appellants Versus Sh. MUHAMMAD ALI and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP 108 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | C. A. Rahman, |
| Parties | REHMAT ALI and another — Appellants Versus Sh. MUHAMMAD ALI and 3 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Arbitration Act (X of 1940) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 108 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Arbitration Act (X of 1940) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 108 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: C. A. Rahman,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 108 (MLD) (REHMAT ALI and another — Appellants Versus Sh. MUHAMMAD ALI and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Sajjad for Appellants:
- Karamat Nazir Bhandari for Respondent No.l.
- Date of hearing: 5th May, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 18 & 41--Order passed by trial Court modified by High Court- Parties arriving at settlement--Petitioner not interested in any further relief in view of modification of order by High Court--Order, held, to remain modified till application pending before trial Court is finally disposed of.
Judgment & Decree
Although, the case was fixed for the disposal of C.M. No.871/C-85 today, learned counsel for the parties have requested that the main case may be disposed of as they have arrived at some settlement. Let their statements be recorded. (Sd.) C.A. Rahman Judge statement of Syed Sajjad, Advocate for the Petitioners without oath. The impugned order was passed by the learned trial Court on an application moved by respondent No.l under section 18/41 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. That application has not been finally disposed of and is being contested by the petitioners. Since tile impugned order has been modified by this Court vide order dated 17-12-1984, the petitioners do not want any further relief from this Court, as the aforementioned application would be finally disposed of by tile learned trial Court after hearing the parties. Under the circumstances, the revision petition may be disposed of. (Sd.) C.A. Rahman Judge State of Mr. Karamat Nazir Bhandari, counsel for respondent No. 1 without oath. I have heard the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioners. The revision petition filed by the petitioners may be disposed of in the light of the above statement. The respondent has no objection against the impugned order as modified by this Court till the respondent's application under section 18 read with section 41 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, is finally disposed of by the learned trial Court. (Sd.) C,A. Rahman Judge Presence as before In view of the statements made by the parties counsel, the, impugned order dated 13-12-1984 shall remain modified as ordered by this Court on 17-12-1984 till the respondent's application under section 18 read, with section 41 of the Arbitration Act pending in the trial Court is finally disposed of. With these observations, this revision," petition stands disposed of. The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 20-5-1985. The record of the case requisitioned for the disposal of this revision petition shall be returned immediately to the trial Court. H . B .P .