Home Maxims & Terms Karachi Port Trust Manual meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Karachi Port Trust Manual

Karachi Port Trust Manual legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

1996 SCMR 727 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Ss. 16, 129 & 171Customs Export Transit Rules, 1974Imports and Exports (Control). Act (XXXIX of 1950), S.3(l)Karachi Port Trust Manual, Paras.37 & 38Afghan Transit Trade Agreement, 1965, Art. XWords "for the security of its own territory" occurring in Art. X of the Afghan Transit Trade Agreement, connotationTransit of goods across Pakistan under Afghan Transit Trade Agreement, 1956 to AfghanistanPower to prohibit or restrict importation and exportation of such goods

Import of goods by Afghan national was ordered to be detained and then seized by Customs Authorities of Pakistan on the ground of non-production of Letter of Credit by the importer

Validity

Transit Agreement and Annexure thereto. did not require tlfe\production of Letter of Credit for clearance of transit goods by the Customs Authorities but the only documents required to be produced at-the time of arrival -of goods was the invoice

Afghanistan being a land-locked country, goods imported by Afghan Nationals from other countries for use or consumption in Afghanistan could not be said to have been imported into Pakistan merely because goods crossed the customs barrier and entered into Pakistan, though to be transited to their designation viz. Afghanistan

Said goods, in fact, are goods in transit to be dealt with and transhiped to Afghanistan in accordance with the Pakistan Afghanistan Transit Trade Agreement, 1965 and Protocol appended thereto

Customs law relating to the importation of goods would not, therefore, be applicable to such goods

Alleged smuggling of the goods into Pakistan could not furnish any valid interpretation to the Authorities to unilaterally take away the facility of transit or to impose any restriction on the duty free import itself which was guaranteed by the Afghan Transit Trade Agreement

Goods having been illegally and wrongfully detained and not allowed to be transited to Afghanistan, direction by High Court to Collector of Customs to issue delay/detention certificate was quite just and fair

Central Board of Revenue and/or the Collector of Customs thus could not ban/disallow import of goods by Afghan nationals under the Afghan Transit Trade Agreement, 1965 during the subsistence of the said Agreement.

1984 PLC(CS) 1253 LABOUR-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PUNJAB Judicial Precedent

Paras. 1.3 & 1.4 read with Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969). Ss. 2 (xxviii) & 25-A-Railway employee-Permanent Way Inspector-Performing supervisory duties and basic pay more than Rs. 800 p. m. Covered by, Exception (b) of S. 2 (xxviii) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969-Not a workman Not within jurisdiction of Labour Court.

1965 PLD 224 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Demurrage

"Lay days" for determining demurrage commence from time ship arrives at outer anchorage and not from time she gets berthed-Charter-party merely naming port without anything further-Vessel deemed' "arrived ship" on mere entrance at outer anchorage-Charter-party containing clause "time lost in waiting for berth to count as loading time"-Clause, a special term Persons other than those parties to charter-party-Cannot be made liable unless bound by independent contract containing clear term that party was so bound-Ship at Karachi Port-Cannot be loaded or unloaded except at the berth-Karachi Port Trust Manual, Rule 12.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Karachi Port Trust Manual", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/13989

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Karachi Port Trust Manual"

CLC 1981
1980-July-27

1981 C L C 1451

PAKISTAN SHIPPING LINES LTD.‑‑Plaintiff Versus TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF KARACHI AND 2 OTHERS — ‑Defendants

Court: Karachi
SCMR 1986
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeals Nos. 66‑K and 97‑K of 1984, decided on 29th May, 1985.

1986 S C M R 56

TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF KARACHI and others‑‑Petitioners Versus Messrs ZAMIR LIMITED and others‑‑Respondents

Court: High Court
CLC 2010
2010-August-3

2010 C L C 1666

TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF KARACHI — Plaintiff Versus KARACHI INTERNATIONAL CONTAINER TERMINAL LIMITED, (K.I.C.T.) — Defendant

Court: Karachi
PLD 1965
Letters Patent Appeal No. 70 of 1961, decided on 8th September 1964.

P L D 1965 (W

NAQI HANNA KHABBAZ AND OTHERS‑Appellants Versus MESSRS DALMIA CEMENT LTD.‑Respondents

Court:
MLD 1990
Constitutional Petition No.D‑989 and 992 of 1987, decided on 26th October, 1989.

1990 M L D 797

H. SHEIKH NOOR‑UD‑DIN & SONS LTD. through its Director‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, CUSTOMS (JUDICIAL), CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE and 5 others Respondents

Court: Karachi
SCMR 1996
Civil Appeals Nos. 361, K‑520 and 521 of 1993, decided on 12th July, 1995.

1996SCMR727

Islamabad and 5 others‑‑‑Appellants Versus JAMALUDDIN and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
SCMR 1988
Civil Appeal No. K‑6 of 1968, decided on 19th January, 1970.

1988 S C M R 922

(A REGISTERED TRADE UNION), KARACHI‑‑Appellant Versus KARACHI PORT TRUST, KARACHI and 2 others‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑S.2(xxviii)‑‑Industrial Disputes Ordinance (LVI of 1959), Ss.2(n) & 5(5)‑‑West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance (IV of 1968), S.2(4)‑‑"Worker" and "workman"‑‑Definition of‑‑Chowkidars and Havildars, whether workmen‑‑Industrial dispute concerning Chowkidars and Havildars of Karachi Port Trust‑‑Jurisdiction of Industrial Court to adjudicate upon‑‑Industrial Court refusing to take up industrial dispute referred by Karachi Port Trust Workers Union on behalf of Chowkidars‑ and Havildars on ground that they were not workmen‑ Order challenged in Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court holding that finding of Industrial Court that members of Watch and Ward Department of Karachi Port Trust did not fall within definition of Workman amounted to saying that they had no locus standi for the relief sought by them and that it was thus not a case of refusal on its part to exercise jurisdiction to warrant interference by High Court‑‑Contention raised that Industrial Tribunal had erred in adopting a definition of workman as used in Ordinance (LVI of 1959) which was wholly against its letter and spirit and High Court, in not correcting this patent illegality, had declined to exercise its Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑Held, Chowkidars and Havildars doing manual work, were included in definition of workman and that legislative intention was manifest from definitions given in subsequent legislation which have resolved all doubts on the point‑‑"Workmen" cover all employees of an industrial establishment, whatever the nature of their duties, and include employees who have been discharged in connection with an industrial dispute or whose discharge has led to that dispute‑ Appeal accepted and case remanded for disposal on merits, accepting status of Chowkidars and Havildars as workmen in establishment of Karachi Port Trust.‑‑Words and phrases.
SCMR 1992
Civil Appeal No.560 of 1990, decided on 17th May, 1992.

1992 S C M R 2166

PAKISTAN ENGINEERING CO. LIMITED, LAHORE through Managing Director‑‑‑Appellant Versus FAZAL BEG and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
SCMR 1994
Civil Petition No. 36 of 1994, decided on 22nd February, 1994.

1994 S C M R 1866

Messrs SAHAF CORPORATION (PVT.) ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus KARACHI PORT TRUST and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
SCMR 1977
Civil Appeal No. K‑19 of 1976, decided on 30th June 1976.

1977 SCMR 247

SHAHZAR KHAN‑Appellant Versus SIND LABOUR COURT No. 4, KARACHI AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: ----Art. 185 (3)‑Appeal to Supreme Court‑Appellant workman categorically admitting allegations against him and praying to be excused‑Lower Courts though not considering case on merits and case as such demanding remand, yet remand, in view of admission of guilt by appellant, neither called for nor in interest of justice Junior Labour Court finding inquiry fair and impartial and such finding not set aside by lower Court, no reasonable ground to interfere with such finding and appeal, held, liable to dismissal ‑Industrial disputes.