1999SCMR 1188 (PLP)
CENTRAL DIRECTORATE through Chief Manager, Lahore — Petitioner Versus JAVED AHMAD and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1999SCMR 1188 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Raja Afrasiab Khan and Sh. Riaz Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | CENTRAL DIRECTORATE through Chief Manager, Lahore — Petitioner Versus JAVED AHMAD and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Public Debts Act (XVIII of 1944) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999SCMR 1188 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Public Debts Act (XVIII of 1944) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999SCMR 1188 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Raja Afrasiab Khan and Sh. Riaz Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999SCMR 1188 (PLP) (CENTRAL DIRECTORATE through Chief Manager, Lahore — Petitioner Versus JAVED AHMAD and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abid Hassan Minto, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Hamid Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Ahmed Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No. 1.
- M. Rashid Awan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.2.
- Date of hearing: 22nd January, 1999.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal against the judgment and order, dated 18-3-1998 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in I.C.A. No.109/1998).
Ss. 2 (a) & 11
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Refusal to issue duplicate Foreign Currency Bearer Certificate
Original Foreign Currency Bearer Certificate having been destroyed, purchaser of said certificate requested the Bank to issue duplicate certificate, but Bank refused to do so, contending that under Rules governing the Foreign Exchange Bearer Certificate, duplicate could not be issued
High Court ordered the Bank to issue duplicate certificate by declaring R.14 of the relevant Rules of 1946 to be ultra vires of S.11, Public Debts Act, 1944
Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to determine questions whether High Court had rightly found R.14 to be ultra vires of S.11 of Public Debts Act, 1944; what was nature of a Foreign Currency Bearer Certificate and could it be equated with a "Bond" as held by High Court; whether Foreign Currency Bearer Certificates were governed by para. (iii) of S. 2 (a) of Public Debts Act, 1944; whether R.14 of Rules of 1946 and S.11 (2) of Public Debts Act, 1944 were attracted to facts and circumstances of the case whether S.11(1-A) of Public Debts Act, 1944 would govern the situation; and whether in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction, High Court could give finding as to genuineness of the claim of respondent/purchaser of Certificates in dispute.
Judgment & Decree
M. Rashid Awan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.2. Date of hearing: 22nd January, 1999. SH. RIAZ AHMED, J:
The State Bank of Pakistan seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 18-3-1998 delivered by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court whereby Intra-Court Appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the order of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 16208 of 1996 was maintained.
2. The facts in brief giving rise to the institution of this petition are that on 15-8-1996 the respondent No. l lodged a claim that the petitioner bank alleging that 10 foreign currency bearer certificates of the value of 10,000 Sterling Pounds each, which he had purchased in the year 1995, had been destroyed and therefore, duplicates of the said certificates be issued to him and profit for the intervening period be also paid to him. The respondent also annexed copy of the F.I.R. alongwith the claim. The petitioner bank refused to issue the said certificates because under the rules governing the foreign exchange beater certificates duplicates could not be issued. The said refusal was then challenged by the respondent through a writ petition, which was allowed and an Intra-Court Appeal against the said order was dismissed vide orders impugned.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner at some length, we are of the view that in this case for determination, inter alia, of the following questions, leave should be granted:-- (i) Whether the High Court rightly held rule 11 to be ultra vires of section 11 of the Public Debts Act, 1944? (ii) What is the nature of a foreign currency bearer certificate? Can it be equated with a bond as held by the High Court? (iii) Whether the foreign currency bearer certificates are governed by para. (iii) of section 2(a) of the Public Debts Act, 1944? (iv) Whether rule 14 of the Rules of 1946 and section 11(1) of the Public Debts Act are attracted to the facts and circumstances of this case or section 11(1-A) would govern the situation? (v) Whether in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction, the High Court could give finding as to the genuineness of the claim of the respondent? Order accordingly. The appeal shall be heard at an early date. H.B.T./S-123/S Leave granted