Liability

Purchaser, by withholding an amount from invoiced amount and paying it to treasury, is discharging part of supplier's sales tax liability on the supplier's behalf

Obligation of purchaser to withhold sales tax under Sales Tax Act,1990 and Sales Tax Special Procedure (Withholding) Rules, 2007 is contingent upon existence of a taxable supply chargeable to tax under section 3 of Sales Tax Act,1990.

Law presumes that a person intended the natural consequences of his actions.

Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court declined to set aside judgment and decree in exercise of powers under S.12(2), C.P.C.

Plea raised by petitioners was that Vakalatnama used was issued for some other purpose and not for litigation in question

Validity

Vakalatnama showed that title of case in question was specifically written, which suggested that Vakalatnama/Power of attorney was issued to counsel for contesting suit in question

Vakalatnama/Power of attorney gave authorization to enter into arbitration, settlement or compromise which was expressly been conferred on the attorney/advocate

Attorney or advocate had not committed fraud with petitioners, who failed to make out a case of fraud or misrepresentation out of the record against respondents or anyone else

When an attorney/advocate had defrauded a person, the only remedy available to that person was to sue his attorney for damages or recovery of any such amount on his part

Other parties could not be dragged into litigation just because of the fact that an advocate had allegedly committed some fraud with any person

Application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. was moved by petitioners beyond prescribed period of three years

High Court declined to accept the plea that petitioners had learnt about judgment and decree in question a few days before filing of application under S.12(2), C.P.C.

Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Safeguard is provided to rightful claimant and liability of holder of succession certificate to rightful claimant under S. 387 of Succession Act, 1925.

Besides the Authority as a statutory organization, the concerned Chairman and every Member of the Board of the Authority were jointly and severally accountable for such loss.

No one could only look for intendment or language used in law and there was no room for intendment or presumption on interpretation of law

If revenue seeking to tax could not bring subject within letter of law, the subject was free, no matter such a construction of law could cause serious prejudice to the revenue

No one could be taxed unless the charging provision had clearly imposed obligation

High Court declared orders/actions attaching bank account of petitioner to be illegal and without lawful authority

High Court directed the authorities to refund the amount illegally recovered from petitioner

Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

Word "otherwise" used in S. 9 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 would also embrace within its ambit, apart from the power of attorney(s) any other documents including special power of attorney, authority letter etc. whereby a person who had verified the plaint could be authorized

If suit had been filed through a person having no authority then principal could ratify the defect if any later-on

Defendant had executed the documents for repayment of amount to the plaintiff-Bank

Guarantor was also liable to liquidate the outstanding dues owed to the plaintiff-Bank

Guarantor could not be permitted to avoid his liability

Every officer of the Bank who was responsible for recommending, approving and advancing finance facility was required to exercise due care and caution before sanctioning or providing any sort of such facility to the customer

Such officer was required to obtain sufficient security for securing the finance facilities

If an officer of Bank had omitted to take sufficient care in extending/advancing finance facilities then he had to suffer

Defendants/borrowers had failed to raise any substantial question of law and fact which might need recording of evidence

Defendants had availed finance facilities and they were bound to pay the outstanding amount

Suit of plaintiff-Bank was decreed to the extent of outstanding amount plus cost of funds till realization of decretal amount

Guarantor was also found liable in his capacity as a guarantor to the extent of guaranteed amount

Suit was also decreed for the sale of pledged/hypothecated goods if any with cost.

Every member of an unlawful assembly in the described circumstances, was vicariously liable for an offence committed by another member of the assembly.

When any validation was accorded by the Parliament to unconstitutional and illegal acts of a usurper (dictator) through any means whatsoever, the Parliament as a whole shall cease to exist because each member by such act would earn the penalty of high treason and would be liable to be prosecuted under the provisions of High Treason (Punishment) Act, 1973

Parliament as a whole was no exception nor was it exempted from such liability rather it was equally liable for such punishment and the moment it endorsed or validated action of dictators on whatever ground, it shall immediately cease to exist and fresh election shall essentially be held for the new Parliament.

Individual role of an accused, in cases of dacoity, did not matter much and every participant of such a crime, regardless of his role, would be an accused in equal degree.

If a person subsequently joins in crime, he is to be burdened with the same liability.

Plaintiff was daughter of the defendant and under the law, father was bound to maintain her till her marriage.

Acknowledgment of liability is to be made by the person who has incurred such liability.

Acknowledgment of liability is to be made by the person who has incurred such liability.

Liability once created under an Act would stick till it is wiped out by Legislature itself. M. Afzal & Son v. Federal Government of Pakistan PLD 1977 Lah. 1327 rel.