Tags Topic Discussed
1. M.A. 11/2014 MUHAMMAD WASEEM SHAFI V/S CHAIMAN / COMMISSIONER COMPANY LAW DIVISION Sindh High Court, Karachi
Appeal of Chartered Accountant dismissed. Penalty maintained.

Matter:SECURITY EXCHANGE COMMISSION

2. Const. P. 7189/2019 Muhammad Sharif Kalhoro V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143940]
transfer and posting

Matter:SERVICE

3. Const. P. 7189/2019 Muhammad Sharif Kalhoro V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (frequent transfer and posting)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143916]
Petitioner has impugned his frequent transfer and posting order dated 04.11.2019 issued by the respondent No.2-Agriculture Supply and Prices Department, Government of Sindh--It is a well settled law that the transfer and posting falls within the ambit of expression ???terms and conditions of service??? and the petitioner cannot claim a vested right on a particular post at a particular place. Therefore, the forum chosen by the petitioner by invoking the Constitutional Jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution is not proper under the law. On the aforesaid proposition, the recent decision dated 16.1.2020 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.622 of 2019 is clear in its terms--Dismissed.

Matter:SERVICE

4. Const. P. 2334/2018 Muhammad Azam and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143907]
Regularization issue in PSM

Matter:SERVICE

5. Const. P. 2293/2018 Noureen Naz and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143874]
Primarily, the petitioners have approached this Court for regularization of their services in Planning and Development Department, Government of Sindh-- It is an undisputed fact that the petitioners were project employees. Their letters of appointment clearly state that their posts were 'temporary project posts' which would be 'likely to continue till the completion of project and keeping in view the completion of project activities and finalization of scope of work relating to job assignment of the petitioners, the competent authority decided to closure of the project under policy decision, it is beyond the jurisdictional domain of this Court to delve into highly technical and purely policy issues which were better left to be dealt with by experts having relevant knowledge, training and expertise in their respective fields and the competent authorities authorized and empowered by law to do so--The petitioners, in our view, have failed to make out their case for regularization of their service as their case is neither covered under Section 3 of Sindh (Regularization of Ad-hoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013, nor falls within the ambit of Policy of Government of Sindh, therefore, the instant petitions are hereby dismissed along with pending application(s) with no order as to costs.

Matter:SERVICE

6. Const. P. 2271/2018 Ms. Shama Hassan and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143906]
The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners were initially appointed by Pakistan Steel Mills and presently performing their duties as teaching and non-teaching staff in the Education Department of Pakistan Steel in terms of letters of contracts issued by Hadeed Welfare Trust for the last many years and are seeking regularization of their contractual services on the strength of order dated 21.03.2017 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Petition Nos.121-K and 122-K of 2017---Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of in terms of orders dated 21.03.2017 and 03.06.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid matters, with no order as costs.

Matter:SERVICE

7. Const. P. 5410/2019 Syed Zulfiqar Ali Shah and Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (probation period)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143905]
Petitioners are seeking direction to the respondent-Sindh Government to annul the probationary period of two (02) years for confirmation of Government jobs--we do not see violation of any fundamental right of the petitioners in relation to fixation of probationary period by the Government. Accordingly, the instant petition, being misconceived, is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.

Matter:APPOINTMENT

8. Judicial Companies Misc. 23/2016 Fakheem Butt V/S M/s. Industrial Waste performance (Pvt.) Ltd & oth Sindh High Court, Karachi
Rectification of Company Register allowed under Section 152 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984.

Matter:DIRECTION

9. Suit 1076/2013 Digri Sugar Mills Limited and others. V/S Mian Kamran Elahi and others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143769]
In a Suit for Declaration, Injunction, Cancellation, Rendition of Accounts and Recovery, Plaintiffs had sought a restraining order against Defendants from presenting postdated cheques given as security pursuant to written agreements between the parties; or to use the same for any criminal proceedings or otherwise. Defendants opposed this application on the ground that section 56 (e) of the Specific Relief Act bars grant of any such permanent injunction; hence, no temporary injunction can be granted. The Court repelled this argument and allowed the injunction application by passing a temporary injunction and restrained the Defendants from using such cheques in any manner pending trial of the Suit.

Matter:DECLARATION

10. Const. P. 7221/2019 Talal Ahmed V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Son quota)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143839]
Police Department--Son quota--The aforesaid legal position of the case explicitly shows that there is concept of only deceased quota subject to all just exceptions and not that of son quota. Since petitioner has applied against son quota in the police department, he is not entitled to such relief under the aforesaid provision--Dismissed in limine.

Matter:SON QUOTA

11. Const. P. 7576/2019 Badaruddin V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Pension)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143785]
the petitioner stood retired from service of respondent-Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited on 18.02.2008 as a Lineman (BPS-8) under Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS) and was drawing monthly pension up-till July, 2015, but the respondent No.2 illegally and unlawfully stopped and withheld his pension---In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs with direction to the competent authority of respondents to look into the matter of the petitioner and provide similar treatment to him as given by this Court to his colleagues Shakeel Ahmed, Anis Hyder and Muhammad Shoukat Qadri in C.P No.D-5734/2018, C.P No.D-6225/2018, and C.P No.D-6766/2019 respectively.

Matter:PENSION

12. Const. P. 2341/2010 Muhammad Anwer V/S The federation of Pakistan & Ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Pension)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143749]
Basically, the matter pertains to minor penalties which were imposed on the petitioners under the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000, (now repealed), they challenged their reduction into lower grade in the Federal Service Tribunal (FST) but their appeals were abated and thereafter they filed these petitions before this Court---In the light of judgment passed by the Hon???ble Supreme Court as discussed supra which was implemented by the respondents in letter and spirit, we are not convinced with the argument of learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioners are not entitled to the financial benefits with effect from the date of their demotion in year 2003, rather from year 2012---In the light of findings of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan vide orders dated 24.3.2010 and 20.5.2010 in the aforesaid proceedings, these petitions are allowed with no order as to costs by directing the competent authority of respondents to re-calculate the pensionery benefits of the petitioners and other benefits as admissible under the law with effect from their demotion and reduction in increment. Such amount must be deposited with the Nazir of this Court within a period of one (01) month which shall be paid to the petitioners on proper verification and confirmation.

Matter:REMOVAL FROM SERVICE

13. Const. P. 591/2018 Okash Khalid Memon & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Appointment by transfer)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143748]
Prime grievance of the petitioners is that Recruitment Rules, framed for the post of Secretary (BPS-17), District Regional Transport Authorities (???DRTA???) and notified on 13.7.2011, provide no room for posting of outsiders, but the respondents in deviation of aforesaid rules are posting the officers of other cadre against the post of Secretary (BPS-17), DRTA---Much emphasis has been laid that the post of Secretary, DRTA, can be filled by the officers of other cadres. We have also noticed that the six (06) posts of Secretary (BPS-17), RTA, and one post of Secretary (BPS-17), PTA, do fall within the ambit of cadre schedule in respect of posts to be filled by officers of PAS, Ex-PCS and PSS. As such, the aforesaid post can only be filled as per Recruitment Rules and subject to eligibility and entitlement, and not otherwise for the simple reason that Provincial Transport Department is a separate cadre and Recruitment Rules are already in the field. The said rules are framed in consultation with the Services, General Administration and Coordination Department, Government of Sindh in pursuance with sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Rules, 1974. In view of the above, we do not agree with the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners, therefore, the petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Matter:QUO WARRANTO

14. Const. P. 7120/2019 Zamir Ahmed Abbasi V/S Lt Cdr (R) Kashif Ahmed Abbasi and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143770]
The Additional Secretary is directed to ensure that vacant possession of the subject flat is taken over from respondent No.1 and/or from any person(s) in possession on his behalf, and is handed over to the present petitioner without fail within seven (07) days from today. Services, General Administration and Coordination Department, Government of Sindh, is directed to pay a sum of Rs.100,000.00 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) to the petitioner on or before the next date of hearing as compensation. The Additional Secretary, Services, General Administration and Coordination Department, is directed to submit a complete list before this Court on the next date of hearing of all such quarters, flats, bungalows and Government accommodation that are in unauthorized occupation or possession of such persons who are not entitled to enjoy possession thereof. Adjourned to 26.02.2020 at 11:00 am when above named Additional Secretary shall be in attendance. Let notice be issued to Chief Secretary Sindh to ensure compliance of this order in letter and spirit.

Matter:ACCOMODATION

15. Const. P. 2157/2008 Muhammad Saleem Shaikh. V/S Prov. of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143605]
Judgment passed by Hon???ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi in the petitions filed to challenge the Combined Competitive Examination 2003 (CCE-2003) conducted by Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC). The Hon???ble Judges constituted a High Powered Inquiry Commission to probe and submit the report to the competent authority.

Matter:SERVICE

16. Suit 81/2019 Muhammad Imran & another V/S Al-Jazirah Engineers and Consultants. & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Application u/o 1 Rule 10 by defendant for deleting another defendant dismissed.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

17. Criminal Appeal 486/2018 MUHAMMAD KASHIF S/O SHER MUHAMMAD & ANOTHER V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143587]
The test for weighing the evidence of identification proceedings is to first assess the ???system variables???, i.e. the precautions taken at the test identification parade, and then to assess the ???estimator variables??? i.e. the capacity and ability of the eye-witness to identify the accused in the circumstance of the case. Rel. Mian Sohail Ahmed v. The State (2019 SCMR 956) and The matter of Kanwar Anwaar Ali (PLD 2019 SC 488).

Matter:IMPRISONMENT UPTO 7 YEARS

18. Const. P. 9013/2018 Raja Naved Khaskheli V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Fake Appointment)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143629]
Petitioner claims to have been appointed on 22.11.2011 as Police Constable in Sindh Police department and has been performing his duties at different police stations and due to involvement of his uncle in departmental proceedings, he has been deprived of his salary which has not been paid to him since September, 2018---Reverting to the claim of the petitioner that he was legally appointed and the Hon???ble Supreme Court has not given any observation against him, therefore the Respondents cannot stop his salary as he is still working on his post, suffice to say that the petitioner is Civil Servant therefore, the forum chosen by him by invoking the Constitutional Jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution is not proper under the law in view of the bar contained in Article 212 of the Constitution. Since the expression terms and conditions includes salary and the Sindh Services Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide such issue and the validity of the impugned action, this petition is not maintainable.

Matter:SERVICE

19. Suit 70/2019 Nadeem Durrani V/S M/s. National Bank of Pakistan & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction application for reinstatement in service dismissed.

Matter:INFRINGMENT

20. Const. P. 7563/2018 Irshad Ahmed Siyal and Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Contract employee)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143630]
Petitioners have approached this Court for regularization of their service in Health Department, Government of Sindh--It is well settled now that regularization of the services of the petitioners on the premise that regularization is always subject to availability of post and fulfillment of recruitment criteria, apparently the petitioners have not initially been appointed in an open and transparent manner through the prescribed competitive process as the vacancies were not advertised in the newspaper. Besides it is well-settled law that a contract employee is debarred from approaching this Court in constitutional jurisdiction, in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Qazi Munir Ahmed versus Rawalpindi Medical College and Allied Hospital and others, 2019 SCMR 648---Before parting with this order, we may observe that the Provincial Cabinet is well within its powers to frame policy, however, subject to law. It is well-settled that if a policy manifestly inconsistent with the Constitutional commands, retrogressive in nature, and discriminatory inter se the populace is not immune from judicial review. Prima-facie the decision of the Cabinet dated 29.3.2018 does not cover the case of the petitioners under Sindh (Regularization of Ad-hoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013, as their appointment is after promulgation of the said Act i.e. 25.3.2013--Dismissed.

Matter:SERVICE

21. Const. P. 5682/2014 Zaheer Ahmed V/S Province Of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143568]
Appointment as Police Constable in Police Department, on the basis of son quota---In the light of above discussion, it is crystal clear that Police Department cannot circumvent the law to make recruitment to the post of police constable on the basis of son quota by issuing Standing Orders or by invoking Rule 11-A of Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1974. The appointment of police constable can only be made through competitive process on merit as provided under the recruitment rules and not otherwise.--Dismissed.

Matter:IMPLEMENTATION

22. Judicial Companies Misc. 14/2019 Gulshan Spinning Mills Ltd. & others V/S xxxx Sindh High Court, Karachi
Compromise with secured creditors u/s 279 to 28b of the Companies Act allowed. Objections of minority secured creditors dismissed.

23. Suit 1828/2019 Muhammad Azam Khan V/S P.I.A Corporation Ltd & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction against Transfer of an employee of PIA from Karachi to Islamabad dismissed.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

24. Const. P. 340/2013 M.Saleem Khan V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Proforma Promotion)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143512]
proforma promotion

Matter:SERVICE

25. Const. P. 6382/2019 Muhammad Jibran Nasir & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143309]
Police case

Matter:AGAINST SECTION

26. Judicial Companies Misc. 18/2019 COASTAL REFINERY (PVT) LTD ANOTHER V/S xxx Sindh High Court, Karachi
Amalgamation and restructuring under Section 279 to 283 of Companies Act 2017 allowed.

Matter:MERGER

27. Suit 2089/2019 Gauhar Ajmal V/S Province of Sindh & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Termination notice from service suspended.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

28. Suit 338/2013 MUHAMMAD SALEEM & OTHERS V/S AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE CO. (PAK) LTD & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi
Application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC dismissed.

Matter:DECLARATION

29. Const. P. 838/2014 Imran Ahmed Ansari V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143220]
1. Since the Petitioner???s service was terminated under Rule 8(b)(1) of the DHA Service Rules, which rule has since been declared un-constitutional by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Itrat Sajjad (2017 SCMR 2010), the only point left for our consideration is whether the effect of the declaration in Itrat Sajjad on the case of the Petitioner can be addressed by us in writ jurisdiction. 2. It had been settled by a 5 member Bench of the Supreme Court in DHA v. Jawaid Ahmed (2013 SCMR 1707) that applying the ???function test???, the DHA is a ???person??? to whom a writ can issue under Article 199(1)(a)(ii) of the Constitution of Pakistan. But then, moving to a question distinct, viz. whether the employee of a statutory authority can invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High Court to enforce service rules of the statutory authority, it was held that where service rules were non-statutory, those cannot normally be enforced in writ jurisdiction for such rules attract the principle of ???master and servant???; but at the same time it was also held that where action of a statutory authority in a service matter is in violation of principles of natural justice, such action can be interfered with in writ jurisdiction. Itrat Sajjad reiterates the same principles, and while it was concluded that the DHA Service Rules are non-statutory and thus not enforceable ordinarily by way of a writ petition, the judgment went on to hold that since Rule 8(b)(1) of the DHA Service Rules violated the principle of natural justice, the case fell within the recognized exception that a writ can issue where the action of a statutory authority in a service matter is violative of the principle of natural justice. For the same reason, this petition, to the extent it assails termination issued under the same Rule 8(b)(1) of the DHA Service Rules, is also maintainable.

Matter:SERVICE

30. Suit 1959/2018 Riffat Humayun V/S Pakistan Television Corporation Ltd & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Plaint rejected as Resjudicata applies. Earlier petition stands dismissed upto the level of Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Matter:DECLARATION

31. Suit 825/2014 Kashif Riaz & Others.. V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Application for return / payment of profit on amount deposited with Nazir after dismissal of Suit cannot be allowed in favour of Plaintiff.

Matter:DECLARATION

32. Suit 1148/2013 Vaneeza Umeran. V/S Shamim Mushataq Siddiqui and ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction granted in respect of strategy plan and Transfer of Benami assets.

Matter:DECLARATION

33. Const. P. 6845/2016 Juanid Ahmed Sarki V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Deceased quota)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143036]
Deceased quota

Matter:DECEASED QUOTA

34. Const. P. 53/2019 Muhammad Ibrahim V/S Post Master General Khi and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Pension matters)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143539]
Record reflects that petitioner has attained the age of superannuation in the year 2019, therefore, no further recovery can be initiated from his pensionery benefits. The respondents are directed to adjust the deducted amount in the pensionery benefits of the petitioner accordingly.

Matter:SERVICE

35. Const. P. 6766/2019 Muhammad Shoukat Qadri V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Pension matters)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143037]
pensionery benefits

Matter:PENSIONARY BENEFITS

36. Const. P. 5784/2014 Abdul Salam Khatri V/S D.G MC & C and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143005]
The issue of transfer and posting from one Cantonment Board to another Cantonment Board has already been settled by the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Tariq Iqbal and others.

Matter:SERVICE

37. Const. P. 2761/2011 Sadiq Ali Khan V/S University of Karachi & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143004]
if the remedy of appeal is available to a party under the statute, availing such statutory remedy, and without calling in question the appellate order, only seeking setting aside the original order in the Constitutional jurisdiction of this court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 is not proper under the law

Matter:SERVICE

38. Execution 58/2004 M/S. A.H. SERVICES V/S PROV. OF SINDH & ORS. Sindh High Court, Karachi
When the decree provides for an alternate mode for satisfaction of the decree, this is not a case that requires treating the Execution as a suit under section 47 CPC to determine a disputed question of fact.

39. Const. P. 502/2019 Mst .Rani Khaskheli V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (service general )

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143003]
Shahadat

Matter:SHAHEED BENEFIT

40. Const. P. 8251/2019 Jamal Nasir V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Promotion)

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143006]
STEVTA

Matter:SERVICE

41. Suit 2150/2018 M/s. Allied Plastic Industries (Pvt.) Ltd V/S M/s. ICC Chemical Corporation & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction allowed in respect of encashment of Letter of Credit by deposit of the amount with the Nazir of this Court.

Matter:DECLARATION

42. S.M.A 47/2017 Raza Muhammad S/o (Late) Muhammad Hussain V/S Nil Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: S.M.A ()

[SHC Citation: 2020-SHC-KHI-143031]
Petition not maintainable. Dismissed.

Matter:LETTER OF ADMINISTRATION

43. S.M.A 315/2019 Ms. Anam Jawed D/o Syed Jawed Naseer V/S Nil Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: S.M.A ()

Matter throughout remained non-contentious. Petition granted.

Matter:LETTER OF ADMINISTRATION

44. S.M.A 144/2016 Meer Hussain Buksh Talpur S/o Meer Muhammad Murad V/S Nil Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: S.M.A ()

Petition being non-contentious was granted.

Matter:LETTER OF ADMINISTRATION

45. Suit 1798/2016 Syed Ali Haider & others V/S Pakistan International Airline Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142349]
Suit decreed. Independent promotion orders cannot be recalled through Admin Order No. 17/2016 without proper Notice and confronting the Plaintiffs.

Matter:DECLARATION

46. Suit 1646/2008 Arshad Mahmood & Others V/S Province of Sindh Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142380]
Since the Hindu Gymkhana is a Government-owned protected heritage and the Subject Agreement is not with any private-owner of protected heritage under sections 7(3) to 7(5) or section 8 of the Sindh Cultural Heritage (Preservation) Act, 1994 [the Heritage Act], the role of the Advisory Committee envisaged under the said provisions is also not attracted. For the same reason the power of the Advisory Committee to pass a prohibitory order under section 10 of the Heritage Act, which is dependent on an agreement with the private owner under section 8 of the Act, is also not attracted. The record does not show that the Government sanctioned ???custodianship??? of the Hindu Gymkhana to the Advisory Committee under section 7(1) of the Heritage Act; nor does the criteria of section 13 of the Heritage Act seems to be met by the Hindu Gymkhana. Thus, having seen that the provisions of sections 7, 8, 10 and 13 of the Heritage Act are not attracted to the circumstances of the case, prima facie it cannot be said that construction of a theatre by NAPA on the land granted to it was prohibited by the Heritage Act, or that the said Act required NAPA to obtain the approval of the Advisory Committee before raising such construction. Impugned notice to remain suspended pending suit.

Matter:DECLARATION

47. Suit 1404/2019 Abdul Rashid Shaikh V/S M/s National Refinery Limited & another Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction seeking suspension of early retirement and reinstatement into service dismissed.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

48. Suit 1684/2019 Kainaat Development Association V/S Province of Sindh & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction against award of Tender dismissed.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

49. Suit 972/2005 DR. HASAN FATIMA JAFERY & ORS V/S ROYAL SAUDI CONSULATE KARACHI & ANOTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: The State Immunity Ordinance, 1981 (), Diplomatic and Consular Privileges Act, 1972 ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142921]
With the passage of time, the principle governing immunity has undergone a change. National Courts in different jurisdictions, specially where there exists constitutional dispensation, have generally narrowed down the scope of immunity, whether constitutional, diplomatic or any other type of immunity. One of the reasons for adopting such view, while interpreting the law or clauses relating to immunity is that the concept of immunity is to be balanced with the accountability and those rights guaranteed as fundamental and human rights.

50. Criminal Miscelleneous 154/2019 MRS. FARHEEN W/O AURANGZEB MUHAMMAD KHAN V/S THE STATE & ANOTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142347]
1. The ratio of the said judgments of the Supreme Court is that where the remedy under section 249-A Cr.P.C. is available before the trial Court, the High Court should not exercise inherent jurisdiction under section 561-A Cr.P.C except in extraordinary circumstances which warrant such an action. In other words, the question is not to the jurisdiction of the High Court, but the manner in which such jurisdiction is to be regulated by the High Court. Ref. Muhammad Farooq v. Ahmed Nawaz Jagirani (PLD 2016 SC 55); Maqbool Rehman v. State (2002 SCMR 1076); Bashir Ahmed v. Zafar-ul-Islam (PLD 2004 SC 298); Mian Munir Ahmad v. State (1985 SCMR 257). 2. It is a misconception to state that in all cases where it is being contended that a civil dispute has been converted into a criminal case, an applicant need not approach the trial Court under section 249-A Cr.P.C. or 265-K Cr.P.C. 3. The argument that section 249-A Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked until a formal charge is framed under section 242 Cr.P.C., is misconceived. Section 249-A Cr.P.C. categorically states that the power thereunder can be exercised ???at any stage of the case???. Rel. State v. Ashiq Ali Bhutto, 1993 SCMR 523.

Matter:QUASHMENT

51. Const. P. 1885/2019 Abdul Majeed V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142462]
Deceased Quota

52. Const. P. 3504/2017 Manzoor Ali V/S P.O Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142445]
Deceased Quota

53. Const. P. 1140/2018 Muhammad Awais V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142451]
Deceased Quota

54. Const. P. 2676/2018 Javed Akhtar V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142454]
Deceased Quota

55. Const. P. 1709/2019 Atta Hussain V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142460]
Deceased Quota

56. Const. P. 2872/2018 Zulfiqar Ali V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: Service matters (Deceased quota)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142456]
Deceased Quota

57. Const. P. 1937/2019 Arbab Ali V/S P.O Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142461]
Deceased Quota

58. Const. P. 2893/2017 Noor Muhammad V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142443]
Deceased Quota

59. Const. P. 2680/2018 Sachal Khan V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142455]
Deceased Quota

60. Const. P. 1708/2019 Bashir Ahmed V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142459]
Deceased Quota

61. Const. P. 78/2019 Sharoon V/S P.O Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142458]
Deceased Quota

62. Const. P. 3319/2018 Suresh Kumar V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142457]
Deceased Quota

63. Const. P. 3082/2017 Fida Hussain V/S P.O Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Contempt

64. Const. P. 2510/2019 Mst.Razia Bibi V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142463]
Deceased Quota

65. Suit 1068/2019 Mohammad Tarique Khan V/S Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Service matter. Show cause notice suspended regarding imposing of major penalty of removal from service.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

66. Const. P. 2467/2018 Boota Masih V/S P.O Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142453]
Deceased Quota

67. Suit 894/2015 M/s. Zubair Hassan Enterprises V/S Frontier Works Organization (FWO) & another Sindh High Court, Karachi
Application for recalling of Arbitrator's appointment dismissed as no power of review is available.

68. Suit 179/2015 S.M. Ali Zaman Gardezi. V/S Federal Tax Ombudsman (F.T.O) & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Plaint returned as Plaintiffs are Civil Servants and have to approach the Federal Service Tribunal.

Matter:DECLARATION

69. Suit 2249/2016 Indus Motor Co., Limited. V/S Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142108]
Audit of Taxpayers under Section 25 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 and Section 45 and 46 of the Federal Excise Act 2005.

Matter:DECLARATION

70. Judicial Companies Misc. 15/2000 State Bank of Pakistan V/S Bankers Equity & another Sindh High Court, Karachi
Application under Section 310 of Companies Act dismissed due to delay in approaching company Court.

71. Suit 2022/2016 M/s. Quality Fertilizer(ISSUES) V/S Abu Dhabi Fertilizer Industries Limited Sindh High Court, Karachi
Maintainability of Suit-issue, Territorial Jurisdiction.

Matter:DECLARATION

72. Suit 719/2015 Engro Corporation Limited. V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Levy of Capital Gain Tax under Section 37A of Income Tax Ordinance 2001 upon sale of shares of unlisted company.

Matter:DECLARATION

73. Const. P. 7679/2019 Dar ul Sukun and Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142181]
Senior Citizens matter

Matter:DIRECTION

74. Const. P. 977/2019 Public Interest Law Association of Pakistan V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142182]
Bomb Detector Khoji case

Matter:DIRECTION

75. Suit 486/2019 NSED Development Limited V/S Habib Bank Limited & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction seeking Specific Performance of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dismissed.

Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

76. Const. P. 3508/2018 Riasat Ali and Ors V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142000]
1. Pursuant to Article 129 of the Constitution, the executive authority of the Provincial Government is to be exercised by the Provincial Cabinet as a collective entity albeit in the name of the Governor. When a Provincial statute, such as the Sindh Agriculture University Act, 1977, provides for the exercise of executive authority by the Provincial Government, that is to be done and the decision for that has to be taken by the Provincial Cabinet and not by the Chief Minister alone. Rel: Mustafa Impex v. Government of Pakistan (PLD 2016 SC 808); Karamat Ali v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2018 Sindh 8); Mirpurkhas Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Province of Sindh, C.P. No.D-8591/2018. 2. Having seen that the word ???Government??? in section 27(1) of the Sindh Agriculture University Act, 1977, as it stood amended at the relevant time by the Sindh Universities and Institutes Laws (Amendment) Act, 2014, could only mean the ???Provincial Cabinet???, the decision to extend the tenure of the Respondent No.5 as Vice Chancellor for another term, and the terms and conditions of such extension, had to be taken by the Provincial Cabinet and not by the Chief Minister in isolation of the Provincial Cabinet.

Matter:APPOINTMENT

77. Suit 1395/2001 M/S. QASIM FREIGHT STATION PVT. LTD. V/S PORT QASIM AUTHORITY. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction dismissed.

Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

78. Suit 949/2016 M/s. Crescent Steel & Allied Products Ltd. V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Plaint returned Order 7 Rule 10 CPC.

Matter:DECLARATION

79. Cr.Rev 201/2019 MST. NAGHMA IMJRAN WD/O IMRAN KHAN V/S THE STATE & ORS Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-142013]
The Explanation clause of section 435 Cr.P.C. entails that while the High Court can call for and examine the record of proceeding before a Magistrate, either suo moto or in Revision arising from an order of a Sessions Judge, a Revision ???application??? against the order of a Magistrate is to filed by the litigant to the Sessions Judge to whom the Magistrate is a Court ???inferior??? within the meaning of the Explanation clause of section 435 Cr.P.C.

Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER

80. J.M 62/2017 Army Ammunition Depot Malir Cantt V/S Mr. Faud Azim Hashimi & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Permission for underground water tank granted.

Matter:APPLICATION U/S 12(2)

81. Suit 362/2015 Wakeel Akhtar V/S Shahzad Alam Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141811]
While Article 84 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order provides a mode for proving execution of a document by comparison of signature or hand-writing, that is an additional mode and not a substitute of or an alternate to the mandatory provision of Article 79 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order. The mode of proof by way of Article 84 is not the most desirable of modes in that, the signature and hand-writing of a person may vary with time and age; or a person called upon under sub-Article (2) of Article 84 to give a specimen of his signature or hand-writing may feign the same to defeat the comparison.

Matter:DECLARATION

82. Cr.Bail 1507/2019 FAHEEMUDDIN S/O ALEEMUDDIN V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141810]
In section 395 PPC, while the alternative to life imprisonment is rigorous punishment ???which shall not be less than four years nor more than ten years???, that alternative punishment still provides for a maximum of 10 years, keeping the offence within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Thus, at the stage of bail when the Court looks at the alternate punishment provided under section 395 PPC, that is for the purposes of considering whether the case is one of further inquiry within the ambit of sub-section (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C., and it is not to say that the case does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C.

Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST

83. Suit 2215/2014 Muhammad Kashif Vohra. V/S Muhammad Ismail & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141789]
1. A suit for specific performance of contract of immovable property brought by the vendee can be dismissed without going through a trial where the plaintiff, when put on terms to deposit the sale consideration in Court, fails to do so. That has been the consistent approach on the Original side of this Court. The wisdom behind that of course is that when called upon by the Court, if the plaintiff/vendee cannot demonstrate that he is ready and willing to make payment to perform his part of the contract, which is the primary test for grant of equitable discretionary relief in a suit for specific performance, then that is sufficient reason for the Court to decline the exercise of discretionary jurisdiction. Rel: Allah Ditta v. Bashir Ahmed (1997 SCMR 181); Abdul Hameed Khan v. Ghulam Rabbani (2003 SCMR 953); and Hamood Mehmood v. Shabana Ishaque (2017 SCMR 2022); 2. It is not in every case that the Court may require the plaintiff of a suit for specific performance of contract to deposit the sale consideration in Court. Rel: Bin Bak Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Friends Associates (2003 SCMR 238).

Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

84. Suit 1161/2019 Syed Muhammad Iqbal & others. V/S Pakistan International Airline Corp. Ltd & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141561]
Issue of foreign posting of Engineers of PIA involved. Injunction dismissed.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

85. Judicial Companies Misc. 3/2018 Dr. Muhammad Imran Qureshi & Others V/S Mohammad Asif & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141534]
Forensic Audit of Company / Respondent No. 5 ordered in terms of Section 286 of the Companies Act ordered.

Matter:DIRECTION

86. Suit 2227/2015 Allied Bank Ltd. V/S Qamar Hussain Naqvi & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Order VII, Rule 11. (), LIMITATION ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141562]
Plaint rejected by invoking legal maxim ???actio personalis moritur cum persona??? and Article 36 of the Limitation Act, 1908. Legal maxim ???actio personalis moritur cum persona??? (a personal right of action dies with the person) ??? death extinguishes liability in Tort, is enforceable in Pakistan subject to certain exceptions. First, where a tortfeasor???s estate is benefited by the wrong done, then an action would lie against his representatives, secondly, when already a decree is passed, inter alia, for damages, the legal representatives / heirs of a deceased can continue the litigation, thirdly, if in a service case, the Trial Court has reinstated a petitioner in service, which is overturned by an appellate court and in the intervening period, person dies, his legal heirs can continue the litigation, because if a Higher Forum restores the Order of Trial Court, then the legal heirs would at least be entitled for the service benefits. However, no suit can be filed after the death of a person for his individual acts, against his legal heirs.

Matter:RECOVERY

87. Const. P. 6554/2019 Ms. Urooj Fatima V/S PM & DC and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141487]
(a) The repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was by virtue of Article 89(2)(a)(ii) of the Constitution, i.e., by a resolution of the Senate disapproving the same and not by way of any repealing enactment. Therefore, the effect of repeal contained in sections 6, 6-A and section 24 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which otherwise apply only when a repeal is by way of a repealing enactment, were neither triggered nor would those serve as an aid in construing the effect of repeal under a Constitutional provision such as Article 89. In other words, on the repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 by the effect of Article 89 of the Constitution, nothing contained in the General Clauses Act, 1897 would come to save the Amending Admission Regulations that had been made under the repealed Ordinance. In view of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council v. Muhammad Fahad Malik (supra), Article 264 of the Constitution also did not have the effect of saving or giving permanency to the Amended Admission Regulations when the effect of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was only temporary as it was never accorded approval by the Parliament. Therefore, on 29-08-2019, when the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was repealed by the effect of Article 89 of the Constitution, the Amended Admission Regulations also stood repealed and the Original Admission Regulations were revived. (b) It will be seen that while the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 50 of the PMC Ordinance, 2019 repeals all previous Regulations, but that is subject to sub-section (7) which provides that the previous Regulations will continue to apply to the on-going admission process. The repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 1962 by the PMC Ordinance, 2019, the former being a permanent statute under the 1973 Constitution, is not a repeal by virtue of Article 89 of the Constitution, but a repeal by a repealing statute, albeit a temporary one, and one which has been expressly made subject to section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which in turn provides that ???the repeal shall not revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect???. We have already discussed above that on 29-08-2019 the Amended Admission Regulations had ceased and the Original Admission Regulations had revived. Therefore, when sub-section (7) of section 50 of the PMC Ordinance, 2019 provides that the previous Regulations will continue to apply to the on-going admission process, those can only be the Original Admission Regulations.

Matter:ADMISSION MATTER

88. Cr.Bail 1083/2019 ARIF BALOCH S/O YAR MUHAMMAD V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141526]
Plea of alibi can be considered at the stage of bail. Rel: Zaigham Ashraf v. The State (2016 SCMR 18).

Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST

89. Const. P. 6439/2019 Javeria V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141488]
(a) The repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was by virtue of Article 89(2)(a)(ii) of the Constitution, i.e., by a resolution of the Senate disapproving the same and not by way of any repealing enactment. Therefore, the effect of repeal contained in sections 6, 6-A and section 24 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which otherwise apply only when a repeal is by way of a repealing enactment, were neither triggered nor would those serve as an aid in construing the effect of repeal under a Constitutional provision such as Article 89. In other words, on the repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 by the effect of Article 89 of the Constitution, nothing contained in the General Clauses Act, 1897 would come to save the Amending Admission Regulations that had been made under the repealed Ordinance. In view of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council v. Muhammad Fahad Malik (supra), Article 264 of the Constitution also did not have the effect of saving or giving permanency to the Amended Admission Regulations when the effect of the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was only temporary as it was never accorded approval by the Parliament. Therefore, on 29-08-2019, when the PMDC Ordinance, 2019 was repealed by the effect of Article 89 of the Constitution, the Amended Admission Regulations also stood repealed and the Original Admission Regulations were revived. (b) It will be seen that while the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 50 of the PMC Ordinance, 2019 repeals all previous Regulations, but that is subject to sub-section (7) which provides that the previous Regulations will continue to apply to the on-going admission process. The repeal of the PMDC Ordinance, 1962 by the PMC Ordinance, 2019, the former being a permanent statute under the 1973 Constitution, is not a repeal by virtue of Article 89 of the Constitution, but a repeal by a repealing statute, albeit a temporary one, and one which has been expressly made subject to section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which in turn provides that ???the repeal shall not revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect???. We have already discussed above that on 29-08-2019 the Amended Admission Regulations had ceased and the Original Admission Regulations had revived. Therefore, when sub-section (7) of section 50 of the PMC Ordinance, 2019 provides that the previous Regulations will continue to apply to the on-going admission process, those can only be the Original Admission Regulations.

Matter:ADMISSION MATTER

90. Const. P. 523/2018 Azizullah V/S Fed: of Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-142431]
Deceased Quota

91. Judicial Companies Misc. 17/2019 M/S COSMOPOLITAN TEXTILE MILLS LTD AND ANOTHER V/S SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISAN Sindh High Court, Karachi
Merger and amalgamation.

Matter:MERGER

92. Suit -1130/2014 Ms Road Tech Pvt Ltd V/S Ms China International Water & Electric Company Sindh High Court, Karachi
Plaint returned under Order 7 Rule 10 CPC.

93. Suit 737/2019 M/S General Services & others. V/S Chief Collector of Customs & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction dismissed.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

94. Judicial Companies Misc. 5/2019 Paramount Spinning Mills Ltd & Others V/S xxx Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140962]
Compromise by Banks approved / allowed. Objection of non-contesting creditor dismissed.

Matter:DIRECTION

95. Judicial Companies Misc. 21/2019 ATLAS AUTOS (PRIVATE)LIMITED AND 2 OTHERS V/S xxx Sindh High Court, Karachi
amalgamation merger.

Matter:MERGER

96. Const. P. 4047/2015 Muhammad Ali Javed and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-141089]
The general principles of up-gradation that to our mind emerge from the enunciations of the Supreme Court can be elucidated as follows: (i) ???Up-gradation??? is not the same as ???promotion???, the latter being a term specifically defined in civil service statutes; (ii) Up-gradation is essentially an upgrade of the post to a higher ???pay-scale??? and not a promotion to a higher ???grade???. Thus, the incumbent of the upgraded post retains his substantive grade; (iii) Up-gradation is meant for isolated posts, where the service structure does not provide avenues for promotion to a higher pay-scale thus putting the incumbent at a disadvantage as compared to other employees, its purpose being to address the stagnation and frustration of the employee of such post so that he/she remains productive; (iv) To justify up-gradation, the Government will have to demonstrate that it is required for restructuring or reforming the department or to meet exigencies of service in the public interest. In other words, up-gradation should be pursuant to a scheme or a policy; (v) Up-gradation should not be to the prejudice of other employees and should not be used to by-pass prescribed rules of promotion. Rel. Ali Azhar Khan Baloch v. Province of Sindh (2015 SCMR 456); Regional Commissioner Income Tax v. Munawar Ali (2017 PLC (C.S.) 1030); and Federal Public Service Commission v. Anwar-ul-Haq (2017 SCMR 890).

Matter:SERVICE

97. Judicial Companies Misc. 33/2017 Mozaffar Islam & another. V/S Dilkusha Enterprises (Pvt.) Ltd. & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Winding up Petition allowed.

Matter:WIND UP

98. Suit 2270/2018 Mir Muhammad Raza V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140722]
Injunction refused in fake degree case

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

99. Suit 1102/2019 Muhammad Khalid V/S M/s Abbot Laboratories (Pakistan) Limited Sindh High Court, Karachi
Suit dismissed under order 10 CPC and application for recalling siad order also dismissed.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

100. Suit 1641/2012 SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD. V/S K.E.S.C LTD. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140624]
Attachment before Judgment

Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT / DAMAGES

101. Suit 1505/2019 Ejaz Spinning Mills Limited V/S Nina Industries Ltd & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Suit for Recovery (Time barred )

Recovery Suit dismissed as being Time barred.

Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT

102. Adm. Suit 1/2019 M/S. COMMERCIAL BANK INT V/S M.V. MISKI AN OTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Admiralty (Ship arrested )

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140564]
There cannot be two decisions with regard to same loan transaction / finance facility; that is, one passed in the foreign jurisdiction as above and the other one in the present proceeding. the Judgment given by the Court of Sharjah (UAE) in the Case filed by present Plaintiff against Defendant No.2, can be executed through the present proceeding. Therefore, the Judgment of Sharjah Court in a sum of AED 5723557 (Five Million Seven Hundred Twenty Three Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Seven Dirhams) together with 5% (five percent) of the legal interest, can be executed through the present proceeding.

Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT

103. Judicial Companies Misc. 43/2017 A- Ameen Trading Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd V/S A Abid Silk Mills Ltd & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Winding up Petition dismissed

Matter:WIND UP

104. Const. P. 451/2016 Ghulam Ali V/S Province of Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: Peasants Rights (Sindh Tenancy Act 1950) (Peasants Rights (Sindh Tenancy Act 1950)), Sindh Tenancy Act, 1950 ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-140521]
Sindh Tenancy Act, 1950

105. H.C.A 103/1988 Dr. Zaki Hassan & ors. V/S Mst. Hajra Bai Mohammad Sindh High Court, Karachi
Review of Judgment dismissed.

Matter:AGAINST ORDER

106. Suit 845/2016 Ashraf Hussain Khan. V/S Abdul Rehman Khan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Administration Suits ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140721]
Cases involving rights of inheritence are at higher pedestal, inter alia, in view of the Sharia Act, 1991.

Matter:LETTER OF ADMINISTRATION

107. Suit 704/2019 Pakistan Airline Pilots Association V/S Pakistan International Airlines & another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Merger ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140421]
Application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was filed by Defendant on the ground that the Suit was barred in terms of Order II Rule2, as earlier another Suit in respect of the same cause action i.e. the Working Agreement between Plaintiff No.1 and Defendant No.1 was filed, wherein, the prayers sought in this Suit were left out; hence, the same cannot be claimed in this Suit. Such argument was repelled by the Court and it has been observed that the bar contained under Order II Rule 2 CPC would not apply, as firstly, the cause of action is not the same, though the question of interpreting the Working Agreement may be; and secondly, the parties to this Suit are not the parties in the earlier Suit, including the Plaintiffs No.2 to 5 who have also come before the Court with their individual grievance, as well as Defendant No.2, the Federation of Pakistan, who owns majority shareholding in Defendant No.1, PIA. It has been further held that in fact, this is a case of a recurring cause insofar as the implementation of the Working Agreement is concerned. Accordingly, the listed application merits dismissal, and it is so ordered.

108. Suit 1163/2019 M/s Ahsan Engineering Works V/S Pakistan Petroleum Limited & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
"Injunction against award of Tender dismissed."

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

109. Suit 1414/2019 Supreme Terminals (Pvt.) Ltd & another. V/S Qasim International Container Terminal & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Injunction allowed by directing Defendant No. 1 to load / unload Plaintiffs containers from its off Dock Terminal.

Matter:DAMAGES

110. Adm. Suit 3/2018 GLANDER INTERNATIONAL BUNKERING DMCC V/S M.V. MISKI AND 2 OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: ADMIRALTY ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140566]
It is an established Rule that pleadings themselves cannot be considered as evidence unless the Plaintiff or Defendant, as the case may be, enters the witness Box and lead the evidence in support of one???s claim or defence. Plaintiff has not come forward to testify and discharge the burden of proof about its claim. The reported decision of Hon???ble Supreme Court handed down in the case of Rana Tanveer Khan v. Naseer Khan-2015 SCMR page-1401, is relevant. Since Plaintiff has failed to prove the allegations against the Defendants, thus the Plaintiff is not entitled to any relief. Suit dismissed.

111. Adm. Suit 7/2018 Fair Sea International FZC V/S MV "MISKI" & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: ADMIRALTY ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140565]
Plaintiff has incurred and still incurring expenses for supply of necessaries and other products to Defendant No.1 since or about 09.10.2017 and onwards, when the Defendant No.1 (subject Vessel) is berthed at Karachi Port; therefore, only those documents can be considered, which relate to this period and onwards, or, when the subject Vessel entered territorial waters of Pakistan and not before that. Suit of the Plaintiff is partly decreed to the extent of US Dollars-120,710.6 (US Dollars One Lac Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred and Ten only) and Pak Rupees-22,42,497/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Two Thousand and Four Hundred Ninety Seven only).

112. Conf.Case 5321/2014 APNA TV Channel Private Limited V/S Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: PEMRA Ordinance, 2002 (Section 29 And 30)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140255]
APNA TV Channel Judgment

113. Suit 1670/2018 Liaquat Ali Bhatti & others V/S Pakistan International Airlines Corporation & ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-140208]
The issue involved in this Suit was in respect of promotions of private Defendants as Chief Engineers from Deputy Chief Engineers in PIA and leaving out the Plaintiffs though they were admittedly senior. It was claimed by PIA that neither seniority nor promotion is a vested right; hence, no case is made out by the Plaintiffs; however, there being no cavil to this legal proposition; such contention has been repelled by the Court and the impugned order of promotion of private defendants has been suspended, for the reason that firstly the Plaintiffs have not been provided with any reason or justification as to why they have been left out; and secondly, even the Court was not assisted as to the entire material and record for promoting private defendants, and therefore, the Plaintiffs cannot be left without any remedy. They being seniors at least ought to have been communicated with a proper response for not being considered so that they could have availed any further remedy as per law; and this has been found a valid ground for suspending the impugned order, whereas, if the management of PIA feels that due to exigency, fresh proceedings are necessary for carrying out promotion(s); then they are at liberty to do so but in accordance with the Agreement and the revised policy, if any, and so also keeping in mind the discussion made hereinabove, including consultation with Defendant No.2 as per the Agreement.

Matter:DECLARATION

114. Judicial Companies Misc. 23/2019 M/S FORTECH CONSTRUCTION (PVT) LTD V/S M/S NATIONAL BEVERAGES PVT (LTD) & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi
Petition under Section 94 of the Companies Act dismissed as petitioner was not a creditor when share capital was reduced by Court's order.

Matter:DIRECTION

115. Suit 1180/2018 Safe Mix Concrete Limited V/S Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
"Territorial Jurisdiction of Court in respect of a Notice issued by Tax authorities @ Lahore.

Matter:DECLARATION

116. Suit 119/2006 MRS. SHABEENA FARHAT V/S V/S M/S HIGHWAY HOUSING PROJECT & ORS Sindh High Court, Karachi 2014 CLC 322 [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-2788]
Defendant has neither provided basic amenities in the Housing Scheme nor has produced any document, rules / bye-laws or Agreement between the parties hereto, to substantiate its evidence, that it is not the responsibility of Defendant to provide these basic amenities. the subject Housing Project launched by Defendant was not complete at least till the time of giving evidence till September, 2014; thus, the grievance of Plaintiff is of continuing nature, inter alia, in terms of Section 23 of the Limitation Law. This is a further ground in addition to the above, for determining that the present lis is maintainable. Hence, suit partly decreed.

117. Adm. Suit 10/2017 M/S. SING FUELS PTE LTD V/S M.V. YASA AYSEN AND OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139874]
Through this is a Suit under Section 3(2) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance, 1980 the Plaintiff had sought recovery of US$ 667,599.35 in respect of the principal outstanding amount, interest, damages and legal costs etc. and had also sought issuance of warrants of arrest for the Vessel i.e. Defendant No.1 and detain the same until sufficient guarantees are furnished for the outstanding claim of the Plaintiff. As an interim measure the vessel was arrested and allowed to sail after furnishing surety for the principal amount. According to the Plaintiffs the Defendant No.5 (?Charterers?) contacted for supply of bunkers to the Vessel in question owned and operated by Defendant No.2 to 4 (?Owners?). It is the case of the Plaintiff that requisite bunkers were supplied, whereas, Charterer has defaulted in making payments and therefore, owners as well as Charterers are liable to pay jointly and severally. The plaintiff?s argument has been repelled by the Court and the application for arrest of vessel has been dismissed in this matter and surety has been ordered to be released / discharged in favor of the owners as the bunker delivery note very clearly and specifically mentions that the supply of bunkers by the bunker supplier is on ?Charterers Account?. This is an admitted document and placed on recorded by the Plaintiff itself. Admittedly nothing has been placed on record so as to suggest that at any point of Time; the plaintiff ever approached the owners of the Vessel before entering into any contract for supply of the bunkers. Nothing has been placed or even pleaded as to whether any consent of the owners of the Vessel was ever sought for making supplies of bunkers and the liability of any payment on the part of the owners in case of any default. It has been further held that the Plaintiff here has not been able to show or substantiate that the Time Charterer had any sort of authority to contract on behalf of the owners or the Vessel; and secondly, even otherwise to safeguard its interest, knowingly that its claim against the Vessel and owner would fail, had obtained sufficient security in the shape of postdated cheques, and is at full liberty to seek its encashment, and if not, then any other appropriate remedy as may be available for it in accordance with the applicable laws. The Plaintiff under no circumstances can be permitted to take undue advantage under the Admiralty jurisdiction of this Court by arrest of the Vessel and then compelling and dragging the owners to pay the amount being claimed when no case for a claim in personam has been arguably made out. The application is therefore dismissed.

Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT

118. Suit 124/2019 M/S Jampur Ltd. BVI V/S Gwadar International Terminals Ltd. Sindh High Court, Karachi
The Plaintiff in these Suits had sought directions against Defendants for filing the Arbitration Agreement in Court and to refer the matter for Arbitration under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act and along with these Suits also filed an application under Section 41 of the said Act for injunction against the Defendants. However, the injunction has been dismissed on the ground that firstly any conclusive findings for passing of an injunction may have an effect on the proceedings if the matter is finally referred to the Arbitrator. Secondly, the Plaintiff had approached the Court after lapse of a considerable period as in between the Defendant had awarded the contract of construction to someone else, whereas, possession of the Site was also taken over and in such a situation no mandatory injunction could be passed.

Matter:ARBITRATION

119. Const. P. 836/2019 Sardar Muhammad Bux Mahar Thr. Tasawar Hussain V/S Mst. Saman Muhammad Mahar and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Guardian and Ward Act, 1890 (Section 7, 8 and 25)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139608]
The natural guardians/mother and father of minors are not required to seek declaration of their guardianship through the Court. The Court under Section 7 of the Guardian and Ward Act, 1890 is not empowered to decide title of guardian about custody of the ward.

Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER

120. Cr.Bail 1141/2019 Kashif Dars S/o Muhammad Usman Dars V/S The State Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Bail Matters ( under Section 498 Cr.P.C r/w Section 561-A Cr.P.C), Criminal Procedure Code Cr.P.C 1898 ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139579]
a) S.498, 561-A Cr.P.C--- Scope: Application of proper procedure; S.498, 561-A Cr.P.C--- Order under S.497(5) Cr.P.C passed by the District & Sessions Judge cancelling the bail of accused charged under Cyber Crime was assailed before High Court---The Court observed that the proceedings filed were half criminal bail application and half criminal Miscellaneous Application. It was further observed that surprisingly the Counsel who was protecting the liberty of his client was unaware of the law and nature of proceedings. As the proceeding under both the provision are distinguished in nature, in fact Deputy Registrar Judicial had to check that whether the instant application under Section 498 Cr.P.C was in the prescribed format for such an application or not. And if it was not the Deputy Registrar should have raised objection to bring it in the proper form. b) Supreme Court.16, 20, 21, PECA 2016 r/w 49, 420, 109 PPC (Prevention of Electric Crimes Act) --- S.497(5) Cr.P.C???Order: In fact in Cyber Crime the accused cannot allege malafide in associating/ connecting him in the crime. The complainant was not aware of the applicant. He had only noticed certain fake pages on internet and Facebook carrying objectionable. FIA by using scientific technics reached to the accused through cell phone number which has been used to the Facebook carrying offensive material. Held--- Since the complainant party was never aware of the person behind this misuse of internet, it cannot be said that complainant had malafidely named the accused and arrested or associated with the offence. The Cell phone was in use of Accused and sufficient documentary evidence appeared against him connecting him with commission of offence. Application dismissed.

Matter:BAIL BEFORE ARREST

121. Suit 2013/2015 M/s. A.F Ferguson & Co., & Others. V/S Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139507]
In all these Suits the claim of the Plaintiffs was to the effect that in terms of Section 92 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 there is no compulsion or restriction that it is only the firm which can file its return and pay taxes on the income, as at the same time, the partners of the firm are also qualified to file their return and pay the tax accordingly and in that situation the firm would not be liable to pay any tax on the income on which the partners have already paid the tax. According to the Plaintiffs, Section 92 does not prohibit the partners from paying tax on their income as against the same by the firm. Their further case was that the inverse of what is provided in Section 92 is permitted as not being prohibited or restricted; however, the contention of the Plaintiffs is held to be misconceived as this would defeat the intention of the legislature and would rather amount to do legislation in favour of the Plaintiffs. The law as it stands today provides a clear mechanism and the principle of taxation which has to be applied on the firm, whereas, nothing could be read into the said provision . It is settled law that the function of the Courts is only to expound and not to the legislate. In view of such position, all Suits have been dismissed by holding that the firm i.e. the Plaintiff No. 1 in all these Suits was required to file its return and pay the tax accordingly; and not the partners individually in respect of the income received from the association of persons or the firm; and once the tax is paid by the firm, then the partners are not required to pay any tax on such income.

Matter:DECLARATION

122. Suit 843/2015 Aroma Travel Services (Pvt) Ltd., & Others. V/S Faisal Al Abdullah Al Faisal Al Saud & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
In this matter Specific Performance of a Memorandum of Understanding was sought which has been declined; as firstly the Memorandum of Understanding was not signed by the Defendants and secondly, a mandatory injunction was asked for to establish a new state of things different from the state which existed at the date when the Suit was instituted. Per settled law such mandatory injunction cannot be granted, in terms of Order 39 CPC.

123. Suit 676/2019 Fazal E Rabi V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139356]
Consignment of the Plaintiff was seized for alleged infringement of intellectual property rights of the complainant; however, the action taken was in violation of Rules 680 and 682 of the Customs Rules 2001 hence, the impugned seizure has been set aside by decreeing the Suit of the Plaintiff.

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

124. Suit 2067/2016 M/s. Getz Pharma (Pvt.) Limited V/S Federation of Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139355]
Through this Suit all Plaintiffs had sought exemption on the packing material imported by them for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products in terms of entry No. 105 of the 6th Schedule to the Sales Tax Act, 1990; however, the said entry only caters for ???raw material??? and not for ???packing material??? therefore, the Suits of the Plaintiffs have been dismissed.

Matter:DECLARATION

125. Const. P. 2847/2017 Sajjad Ahmed V/S P.O Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-139357]
Declare that naming, renaming any street, road, government institute, town, or city after the name of any individual having no positive social, role, courage or exceptional dedication to service in ways that bring special credit to an area, city town is illegal, unlawful against the basic rights of citizens of particular areas, towns, cities and public at large.

126. Suit 5/2007 NOMAN ABID CO V/S NAVEED HAIDER Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139291]
The Plaintiff has already received the amount of disputed cheque, therefore, the present suit was filed with mala fide intention and is not maintainable. Not only this, the overall conduct of the Plaintiff Company, from the time of granting Leave to Defend Application was not of a bona fide litigant. Hence, the present suit is dismissed with costs.

Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT

127. Suit 862/2011 PERVAIZ HUSSAIN & ANOTHER V/S MIAN KHURRAM RASOOL Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139312]
The Defendant issues / has issued the cheques in favour of Plaintiffs, but the same upon presentation could not be encashed because of closure of account, then this conduct on the part of Defendant is a mala fide one and is done with a dishonest intention to defraud the Plaintiffs. Hence, suit is decreed.

Matter:U/O 37 CPC

128. Cr.Acq.A. 89/2015 SYED MUHAMMAD AHSAN V/S MUNAWAR ALI NAQVI & ORS Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 (Section 8), Criminal Procedure Code Cr.P.C 1898 (Sub-section 4 of Section 403)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139056]
Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 (Section 8), Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 (Section 3)

Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

129. Civil Revision 144/2014 Mst. Parveen Raza Jadun through her legal heirs V/S Bashir Ahmed Chandio and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-139035]
(i). In direct benami claim requires a higher standard of proof; (ii) every transaction between family members cannot be recognized as benami; (iii). Claimant not challenged the purchase of property by father in favour of his son, during the life time of the father, then claim of Plaintiff (sister) is meritless.

130. Const. P. 2438/2017 Syed Ali Abbas Rizvi Thr. Nisar Muhammad V/S The Addl. Controller of Rents Clifton & Another Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139151]
The petition is dismissed with costs as the impugned order is an interlocutory order and it does not suffer from any jurisdictional defect or error, this petition, being misconceived and malafide, is not maintainable. The learned Rent Controller is directed to decide the subject rent case within forty five (45) days from receipt of this order strictly in accordance with law and in view of consent order dated 24.08.2010 passed by this Court in C.P. No.S-597/2010 and the judgment delivered by this Court on 10.04.2009 in FRA No.38/2008, and to report compliance within seven (07) days thereafter to this Court through MIT-II.

Matter:RENT MATTER

131. Const. P. 90/2007 Nizar Noor Ali & Ors V/S Ameer Ali & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-139153]
Order of eviction passed by the learned Rent Controller is restored.

Matter:RENT MATTER

132. Cr.J.A 81/2011 Abdul Fattah @ Fattoo V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-SUK-138997]
Whether every member of an unlawful assembly, in respect of an offence committed in prosecution of common object/intention, is guilty of that offence?

133. Suit 621/2017 Mir Jeeand Badini. V/S Model Collectorate of Custom Appraisement & Ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Injuction Applications (Injunciton Dismissed )

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138960]
Import-ability of Dump Trucks after amendment in Import Policy decided in this case

Matter:DECLARATION

134. Cr.Bail 275/2019 Roshan Cholyani V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Topic: Bail Matters ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-LRK-139157]
Mere absondence of Applicant cannot be made ground for rejection of bail, if he is otherwise entitled to the concession of bail. Co-accused was already admitted to bail, hence, Applicant is also entitled to the concession of bail on the ground of rule of consistency. Case calls for further inquiry. Bail granted.

135. Const. P. 428/2019 Khuda Bux V/S SHO P.S K.N.Shah and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-LRK-139057]
Parties recklessly invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of Court, which act on their part consumes valuable time of Court and litigants should be dealt with strictly and such type of petition is to be dismissed with heavy costs.

136. Const. P. 2936/2019 Karwan-e-Amjadia Hajj & Umrah Services & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138878]
Hajj Quota case

Matter:HAJJ QUOTA

137. Cr.Rev 73/2018 Muhammad Bux Chandio V/S Zulfiqar Ali and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Topic: Criminal Procedure Code Cr.P.C 1898 (), Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-LRK-139158]
Investigation under Section 5 of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, was not properly done by the Trial Court and the case was decided merely on the reports of Officials without conducting further probe into the veracity of such reports. Impugned order set aside, case remanded.

138. Judicial Companies Misc. 33/2007 Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan. V/S Beema Pakistan Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138831]
Winding up petition

Matter:WIND UP

139. Cr.Bail 286/2019 Cr. Muzafar Ghanghro V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

Topic: Bail Matters (Sick Person)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-LRK-139156]
Case falling within the ambit of sick person as mentioned in the first proviso of Section 497 Cr.P.C., Applicant is entitled to the concession of bail. Challan submitted. Applicant was not required for further investigation. In order to prove the guilt of the Applicant and to connect him with the commission of the offense, matter requires further inquiry, which can only be done after conclusion of trial. Bail granted.

140. Const. P. 5956/2018 Seemah Irfan V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138542]
Tax matter

Matter:INCOME TAX

141. Const. P. 1830/2019 Ambreen Kazim Main Thompson and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others\ Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138571]
Pakistan Origin Card case

Matter:DIRECTION

142. Const. P. 6572/2016 Sultan Ahmed Shaikh V/S M/s Sui Southerm Gas Co. & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138540]
Promotion case

Matter:AGAINST ORDER

143. Const. P. 2217/2019 Dilbar Khan Nizamani V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138541]
Chairman UC Nazim case

Matter:AGAINST NOTIFICATION

144. Suit 1767/2014 Abdul Sattar Shaikh. V/S Adeel Zahoor Malik & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138471]
Violation of proprietary right being a fundamental right should be remedied forthwith. Failure to examine both attesting witnesses of a Sale Agreement, which is a disputed document, is fatal to the case of Defendant, who is basing his claim on the Sale Agreement. Sufficient evidence is brought on record justifying grant of mesne profits. No Village / Goth can exist in a developed Scheme-36. The Passport entries and presumption of genuineness as envisaged in Articles-90, 92 and 129 (e) of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, is attracted. Hence, Plaintiff is entitled to mesne profits. The conclusive evidence about the wrongful / illegal possession of Defendants No.1 and 2 of the suit plot does not require an inquiry as mentioned in Order XX, Rule 12, Sub Rule 1 (b). Suit Decreed.

Matter:POSSESSION

145. Const. P. 2650/2019 Ms. Saba V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138185]
ADJ appointment/retest case

Matter:FOR WRITTEN TEST

146. Const. P. 896/2019 Muhammad Jawad Mirza V/S D.G PAK C.A.A and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138107]
ATPL Licence case

Matter:DIRECTION

147. Spl.Anti.Ter.J.A. 25/2013 Shahrukh Jatoi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138106]
Judgement in murder case of Shahzaib

148. Conf.Case 1/2013 Reference made by the Judge ATC Karachi V/S Shahrukh Jatoi son of Sikandar Ali Jatoi Sindh High Court, Karachi
Judgment in murder case of Shahzaib

149. Spl.Cr.A.T.A. 25/2013 Shahrukh Jatoi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Karachi
Judgment in murder case of Shahzaib

150. Cr.Rev 40/2014 SHAHRUKH JATOI S/O SIKANDAR ALI V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138104]
Judgment in murder case of Shahzaib

Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER

151. Spl.Cr.A.T.A. 24/2013 Ghulam Murtaza V/S The State Sindh High Court, Karachi
Judgment in murder case of Shahzaib

152. Spl.Cr.A.T.A. 19/2013 Nawab Siraj Ali S/o Imdad Ali Talpur V/S The State Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138100]
Judgment in murder case of Shahzaib

153. Const. P. 1452/2019 Mansoor V/S P.O SIndh Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-138332]
(Ehtaram Ramzan)

154. Const. P. 494/2019 Custom Public School Thr. Akbar Ahmed Khan V/S Aftab Ahmed and others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138193]
Section 21 of SRPO 1979

Matter:RENT MATTER

155. Suit 620/1994 ISMAIL MEMORIAL TRUST V/S KARACH COOP H.S. UNION LTD. & ORS. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Amenity Plot (The Karachi Building and Town Planning Regulations, 2002.)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138212]
Hospitals fall within the category of amenity plots, as envisaged in Article 52-A of the Karachi Development Authority (KDA) Order, 1957. Suit decreed.

Matter:DECLARATION

156. Suit 1713/2012 Sharif Ahmed Qureshi V/S Wing Cdr.(R) Mazhar Mirza and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: PROPERTY (Housing Scheme)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138572]
Housing Scheme_ If a Housing Scheme is announced by Defendant No.3, primarily, for Military Personnel, then either there should be a complete embargo on transferring of land to the civilians, or, if the same embargo is not in place and civilians / citizens can purchase in a housing scheme launched by Defendant No.3, then the policy and formalities of Defendant No.3 should be equitable and fair and no one should be discriminated against. It is understandable that there are security issues, for which NOC and other formalities are to be completed, but the security concern cannot be allowed to be misused, or, under the garb of security issue, rights of citizens cannot be compromised. Proprietary rights are guaranteed under the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973; inter alia, in terms of Article 24. Pleadings_ Admission made in Written Statement (on oath) does not need further proof. Executive Action_ Executive actions based on the premise of national security are justiciable on the basis of Rationale Basis Test. Sale NOC_ Non issuance of sale NOC by the Army Housing Directorate, violates Section 24A of the General Clauses Act, 1897. Thus, requirement of NOC cannot be given that degree of importance or significance, that it can be allowed to impinge upon a statutory and fundamental right of ownership of a citizen, who is a lawful and bona fide transferee of a property, situated in a Housing Scheme of Official Defendants.

157. Const. P. 709/2019 Rab Dino V/S P.O Sindh & Other Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: Ehtram-e-Ramazan Ordinance, 1981 (Section 5)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-137976]
Since in all the petition, the places mentioned does not fall within exemption given under section 5 of the Ordinance, therefore, all the petitions are dismissed.

158. J.M 7/2016 Muhammad Iqbal Pirani. V/S Khurram Ashraf & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (12 (2) C.P.C Allowed. )

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-137997]
Framing of Issues not mandatory. In exceptional cases while deciding 12(2) application, main case may also be decided.

Matter:APPLICATION U/S 12(2)

159. Suit 1461/1998 A. QUBUBUDDIN KHAN V/S CHEC MILLWALA DREDGING CO. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Arbitration Act,1940 (Section 15), Arbitration Act,1940 ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138156]
if illegallity is separable from the main award, the same can be modified / corrected by invocking section 15 of the Arbiration Act, 1940.

Matter:AWARD

160. Suit 2322/2014 Dr. Arifa Farid and others V/S Mitha Khan and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Judgment in rem / personam (), Exception to right of hearing ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-137995]
Exception to right of hearing; where the results can and would not have been any different. Dispute between the government departments should not affect bona fide purchasers. Judgment in rem / personam.

161. Const. P. 2533/2019 Asif Ali V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Deceased Son Quota (), Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion andTransfer) Rules,1974 (Rule 11-A)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-137506]
Sindh Government /Police Department cannot circumvent the law to make recruitment to the post of ASI on the basis of Son/Shaheedquota by issuing Standing Ordersor by invoking Rule 11-A of Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion andTransfer) Rules,1974 and Sindh Shaheed Recognition and Compensation Act, 2014by relaxing the requisite qualification for appointment in the disciplinary force. The appointment of ASI can only be made through competitive process on merit.

Matter:APPOINTMENT

162. Const. P. 6417/2018 Khan Kamran Shamshad V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-137527]
Rustication matter

Matter:AGAINST ORDER

163. Const. P. 653/2019 Najma Altaf Ahmed V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-137530]
Bidding case

Matter:DIRECTION

164. Suit 1417/2012 MRS. ZAIBA KABLY V/S TARIQ NAZIR BUKHARI Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Order Vii, Rule 11 C.P.C (Dismissed.)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138000]
Plaint will not be returned, merely because immovable property is situate outside territorial jurisdiction, when the actual relief sought is for recovery of sale price and damages against wrongful act.

Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT / DAMAGES

165. Const. P. 3733/2016 MQM and Ors V/S Govt. of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-137526]
ELECTION MATTER

Matter:ELECTION MATTER

166. Suit 421/1991 Rahim Ali Palari & ors. V/S Govt. of Sindh & ors.. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Tort Law (Fatal Accident)

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-138015]
Suit under Fatal Accident Act is independent of proceeding under Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965 and Criminal Proceeding (If any). Res Ipsa Loquitor applies to fatal accident cases. If accident / incident disputed then onus on Defendant to disprove negligence. Defendant to disprove causation of death. Criteria for awarding damages. Deprivation of the association of a family member (loss of consortium). Tort Law as a Tool for enforcing good governance. Computing income of deceased when no evidence of employment.

Matter:RECOVERY

167. I. A 82/2018 Mrs. Asma Hassan & another V/S Askari Bank Limited Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: LIMITATION (Limitation Act 1908)

2019 SBLR Sindh 2030 [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-136791]
As a consequence hereof the Limitation Application has become infructous and is disposed-of.

Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGMENT

168. H.C.A 359/2018 Shahnawaz Jalil V/S Rani & Company & others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2019 CLD 1338 [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-136793]
The appeal is allowed in terms herein contained.

Matter:AGAINST ORDER

169. Const. P. 728/2016 Mst. Najma Nighat V/S Mst. Hira Qureshi and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-136913]
Orphans, orphanage houses, Sindh Orphanages (Supervision and Control) Act, 1976, Private Educational Institutions (Regulations and Control) Rules, 2005, Secretary Social Welfare Department,

Matter:FAMILY MATTER

170. Const. P. 2658/2018 Mst. Maya Ghina Ashfaq Khan D/o Ashfaq Ahmed Khan V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Protection, Women, children, vulnerable persons, destitute, domestic violence, Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, welfare of minors, mechanism, safe houses, Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2013,

Matter:PROTECTION

171. Const. P. 1957/2018 Mst Afsheen V/S Province Of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-136912]
Protection, Women, children, vulnerable persons, destitute, domestic violence, welfare of minors, mechanism, safe houses, Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2013,

Matter:CUSTODY MATTER

172. I.T.R.A 55/2015 INTERNATIONAL POWER GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS LTD. V/S THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE. Sindh High Court, Karachi
The aforesaid all ITRA are dismissed as withdrawn along with pending applications. Office is directed to place copy of this order in I.T.R.A. Nos.47 to 55 to 2015.

Matter:INCOME TAX

173. I.T.R.A 46/2015 INTERNATIONAL POWER GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS LTD. V/S THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE Sindh High Court, Karachi
The aforesaid all ITRA are dismissed as withdrawn along with pending applications. Office is directed to place copy of this order in I.T.R.A. Nos.47 to 55 to 2015.

Matter:INCOME TAX

174. Suit 1724/2009 MST.ZAIBUNISA & ORS. V/S IQBAL AHMED & ORS. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Specific Relief Act, (), Tort Law (), Administration Suits ()

[SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-KHI-137999]
Section 39 of Specific Relief Act. Cancellation of Document. An instrument inherently void not required a formal cancellation under Section 39 of Specif Relief Act. Object of Law is to advance justice and remedy the wrong forthwith, instead of putting a law abiding person through the mill. to enforce orderly behaviour in a society. General Damages awarded for sufferings of Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs awarded general damages due to protracted litigation and on account of fraudulent act of Defendants.

Matter:CANCELLATION OF DOCUMENTS

175. Const. P. 628/2014 Rasool Bux Shar V/S Federation of Pakistan Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2019-SHC-HYD-139550]
pensionary benefits

176. Const. P. 804/2009 Mst: Shahnaz Akhtar V/S WAPDA and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: Service matters (Promotion)

Even departmental rules, regulations and instructions, which are non-statutory, have to be adhered to and an employer (Organization) cannot deviate from such rules and instructions, which are in the nature of a contract, binding on the parties. With regard to the Policy matters, it has been held, that even in the absence of vested right, the principle of policy is enforceable. The Respondents have failed to justify the issuance of impugned Officer Order, which ex facie is violative of the policy of the Respondent No.1 contained in Office Memorandum dated 13-04-1988 besides being unreasonable, hence, having no legal sanctity. Consequently, the impugned Office Order is of no consequence and is set aside. Accordingly, petition is accepted and the grant of BPS-15 to the Petitioner is restored with effect from 14-10-1991 and her other service benefits have to be fixed and calculated accordingly.

177. Suit 2609/2015 Dr. Buland Iqbal & Others. V/S The Arts Council of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Election Matters (Stay)

Injunction in Election disputes;

Matter:DECLARATION

178. Const. P. 6274/2017 Bushra Jabeen and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Private Educational Institutions (Regulation and Control) Ordinance, 2001 ()

Private School

Matter:DIRECTION

179. Suit 1625/2016 M/s. Fine Enterprises Traders.. V/S M/s. Constellation Co-Op. H.S. Ltd., & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (O. XXX, R. 1. Application dismissed.)

2019 CLD 185 [SHC Citation: 2018-SHC-KHI-130736]
Suit by a partner on behalf of firm---Maintainability---Partner was not required to have an authority from other partners before initiating any action by way of a suit---No adverse consequence had been mentioned in the provision of O. XXX, R. 1, C.P.C. if compliance was not made---Partner could neither relinquish a claim of the firm nor withdraw a suit or proceeding without the authorization or endorsement of the other partners of a firm.

Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

180. Const. P. 71/1994 Gul Ahmed Textile Mills V/S Collector of Customs & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 ()

[SHC Citation: 2018-SHC-KHI-128932]
Constitutional petition is maintainable even if Federation or Province not impleaded as respondent.

Matter:IQRA SURCHARGE

181. Suit 2400/2017 Dr. Nadeem Khalid Khan V/S Sindh Employees Social Security Institution Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Companies matters (Suspension CaseLaw)

2018 SBLR Sindh 22565
Suspension of employee though not provided in employment rules is permissible under the General Clauses Act

Matter:DECLARATION

182. Const. P. 2110/2009 Muhammad Tariq Qasmi V/S Federation of Pakistan & ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2019 PLC CS 594 [SHC Citation: 2018-SHC-KHI-128812]
EJECTMENT AND RECOVERY OF POSSESSION

Matter:DIRECTION

183. Suit 1007/2000 Mrs. Uzma Moinuddin V/S Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Specific Relief Act, (Suit for Declaration, Injunction and Compensation. Decreed.)

2019 YLR 380
When a Government functionary or statutory body was vested with discretionary powers then same were to be exercised in a structured manner---Discretion was to be exercised in a fair, just and reasonable manner. Suit of Plaintiff was decreed except the claim of damages.

184. Suit 886/1999 Syed Raza Haider Rizvi V/S Gordon Shipping Company Ltd. and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Tort Law (Damages and Compensation), Specific Relief Act, ()

Plaintiff was employee of defendants (employers) who were bound to provide him proper medical treatment---Plea raised by plaintiff was that due to failure of defendants to provide medical treatment, he had suffered permanent physical disability due to injury sustained by him during duty---Validity---Defendants neither produced any document about complete recovery of plaintiff nor had questioned authenticity of documents produced by plaintiff---Expert opinion of doctors further substantiated the fact that till March-1999 plaintiff was not fully recovered from injury which inhibited his pursuit of career---Testimony of plaintiff (employee) and undisputed documentary evidence produced by him weighed in favour of plaintiff as against oral evidence of defendant that complete medical treatment was given to plaintiff---To extent of negligence shown by defendants (employers) in providing incomplete medical treatment of plaintiff stood proved---Suit for damages and compensation was decreed accordingly.

185. Const. P. 1913/2017 Gulzar Ahmed V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: Environment Law (Cutting of Trees), Sindh Local Government Act ()

[SHC Citation: 2018-SHC-SUK-137203]
Cutting of Trees (Environment): Green Belt with trees is a 'Public Trust' resource. Environmental Human Rights are in fact fundamental human rights. Plea of National Security is also justiciable. "Rational Basis Test" explained. Balance is to be struck between the policies relating to security and civil liberties. State Institutions are subject to the accountability. Judiciary in a Muslim Polity is clothed with greater obligation. Only concern council can direct the cutting of dangerous trees under paragraph 55 of Part II-Schedule II of SLGA 2013.

186. Suit 1142/2003 Pakistan Battery Mfg. Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. and another V/S Muhammad Fahad Farooqi and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Suit for Specific Performance. Suit Decreed except the prayers clause of awarding the compensation for withholding the performance. It was held that since the specific performance of MoU is allowed, subject to codal formalities, therefore, the claim of compensation of plaintiff is rejected.

187. Suit 1650/2008 Mrs. Shamima Alam V/S Syed Abu Obedah and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Suit for Declaration,cancellation and Injunction decreed as prayed, the damages were also awarded.), Tort Law ()

Suit for Declaration, Cancellation, Injunction and Mesne profit. suit decreed except the Mesne profit as same were not proved. However, damages were awarded to the plaintiff for the loss which she suffered on account of demolition of boundary wall of her plot.

188. Suit 1689/2008 Mst. Saira Khatoon V/S Syed Muhammad Ashraf and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Recovery of Earnest Money and Damages), Tort Law ()

[SHC Citation: 2018-SHC-KHI-124173]
Suit for Recovery of Earnest Money and Damages decreed. The defendant had not any authority from the owner of the apartment for its sale, hence, the defendant through misrepresentation and fraud, induced the plaintiff in paying the amount of rupees fifty thousand towards part payment/earnest money for sale of apartment. The Defendant no. 1 was directed to pay the earnest money and the damages of rupees five hundred thousand to the plaintiff.

189. Suit 665/2003 Umar Islam Khan V/S Abdul Basit and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Declaration and Cancellation)

[SHC Citation: 2018-SHC-KHI-123493]
Suit for Declaration and Cancellation decreed. Held that the impugned transaction/transfer in favour of Defendant No. 1 is to be struck down on three grounds. (i) Admittedly no sale price was paid by the Defendant no. 1 to plaintiffs. (ii) Even the mother could not have entered into such type of transaction, if at all it even assumed that deceased mother of plaintiffs did sign the affidavit, though no convincing evidence has been led by Defendant No. 1 with regard to this fact, and (iii) Under section 11 of Contract Act, Plaintiffs No. 2 and 3, being minors at that relevant time, could not have entered into sale transaction with Defendant No. 1, again, even if it assumed that these plaintiffs had signed the documents under challenge; such kind of transaction is held void ab initio.

190. Suit 1744/2016 Hanif Ahmed and another V/S Sindh Building Control Authority and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Injuction Applications (Injunciton Dismissed )

Application U/O. XXXIX, R. 1 & 2 C.P.C dismissed.

191. Suit 139/2007 Diamond Weld Rods (Pvt) Limited V/S Messrs Stal Co GmbH and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Shipping (suit for recovery of money (freight)), Civil Procedure Code CPC ()

2018 PLD SC 483 [SHC Citation: 2018-SHC-KHI-122573]
Suit for recovery of money and injunction---Freight. Document produced by plaintiff as Bill of Lading was though not forged but it did not fulfil requirement of Bill of Lading and same could be considered as such--- Bill of Lading produced by shipping company was genuine as it fulfilled its statutory requirements---Plaintiff was required to pay freight to shipping company as Bill of Lading clearly mentioned that 'freight to be collected at destination port'---Such legal and factual position was backed by Ss. 47 & 48 of Karachi Port Trust Act, 1886 and goods could not be removed from public warehouse or sheds until freight in respect thereof was paid either to master or owner of vessel--- Suit was decreed accordingly.

192. Suit 622/2003 Major Ret. Sheikh Abdul Naeem V/S Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC ( Declaration and Injunction. Suit dismissed.)

2018 YLR 2210
Suit for declaration---Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority---Cancellation of allotment of plot---Plaintiff being employee of Pakistan Army was allotted plot but same was cancelled by the Housing Authority on the ground that he had already been allotted another plot---Contention of plaintiff was that said plot was allotted to him as per his service entitlement---Validity---Plaintiff was earlier allotted a plot under his membership---Plaintiff when filled up and submitted application form knowingly suppressed the fact with regard to allotted plot---Plaintiff was not entitled to more than one residential plot under by-laws of the Housing Authority---Impugned allotment was in violation of by-laws of the Housing Authority---Allotment of suit plot had been obtained through misrepresentation of facts---No person could be allowed to retain ill-gotten gain---Court was not to come to the aid of a person to retain a benefit or privilege to which he was not entitled at the very inception---Plaintiff was afforded chance to appear before the Scrutiny Committee of Housing Authority but he failed to avail that opportunity---Housing Authority had not violated any of the principles of natural justice---Suit was dismissed in circumstances.

193. Suit 1482/1998 Abdul Wahid V/S Deedar Ali Issran Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Specific Performance (Suit Dismissed. )

[SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-121453]
Sale Deed registered in favour of defendants are valid documents and have been entered by the authorized Attorney (having registered sub-irrevocable general power of attorney which is in pursuance of earlier registered irrevocable general power of attorney given by the legal heirs to one of legal heirs) of the plaintiffs. Suit dismissed.

194. Const. P. 7826/2017 Naila Maqbool and 136 Others V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
MBBS-BDS Admission Test (NTS) CPD 7826-2017

Matter:ADMISSION MATTER

195. H.C.A 47/2013 Haroon Zia Malik V/S Mst. Fariha Razzak and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: H.C.A (Revocation of Gift)

2018 YLR 1557 [SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-120052]
Plaintiff was owner of suit property who voluntarily gifted the same to the donee-wife---Trial Court had correctly appraised the evidence while recording his findings---Impugned gift deed was not a forged and fabricated document but same had been signed by the donor---Suit property had been gifted in favour of defendant who was wife of donor at the relevant time---Ingredients of gift were offer, acceptance and delivery of possession which were present in the case---Possession of suit property was already with the donee which till date continued to be with her---If husband had made a gift of anything to his wife or vice-versa then it could not be retracted---Transaction in question was not a financial one but it was gift of which a reciprocal financial obligation was not a consideration---Provisions of Arts. 17 & 79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 were not applicable in the matter of gift---Gift did not require a compulsory registration---Donor did not suffer any mental distress at the hand of donee---Impugned judgment did not suffer from any infirmity or illegality---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

196. Suit 627/2017 Mr. Hamood Mehmood V/S Mst. Shabana Ishaque and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Specific Performance (Suit Dismissed. )

2018 YLR 713
Plaintiff, in the present case, enjoyed the ad-interim injunctive relief but despite giving ample opportunities and chances to comply with the orders of Court he kept on defying all such directions/orders---One who sought equity must also do equity---Suit was dismissed in circumstances.

197. Suit 1151/2011 Mrs. Hailey Vincent D'Abreo V/S Province of Sindh and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (- Suit for Possession and Permanent Injunction)

Rent arrears of School building. S.R.P.O does not apply to the Government buildings. Relief of rent arrears and possession of school building was allowed.

198. Suit 889/1998 Mirza Abdul Sattar Baig V/S Pakistan Railways and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Suit for Declaration, Permanent and Mandatory Injunction. Suit dismissed with cost.)

Suit for Declaration, Permanent and Mandatory Injunction dismissed with cost.

199. Suit 327/1966 Raza Hussain and others V/S Muhammad Khan and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Specific Performance (Compromise, Direction. )

2018 YLR 1053 [SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-116992]
Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell. Directions to the Nazir to handover the possession of suit land to its claimants.

200. Const. P. 1802/2017 Premier Battery Industries Pvt. Ltd. V/S Karachi Water and Sewerage Board and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Public Procurement matters (Public Notice/Bidding process)

2019 CLC 583 [SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-116906]
Once the procuring authorities started bidding/ tendering process, provisions of Rr. 17(3) & 18 of Sindh Public Procurement Regulatory Authority Rules, 2010, would be applicable and such stage was a subsequent one and had not reached---Petitioner did not have any locus standi to assail procurement process, as it did not even participate in first stage of the process by submitting Expression of Interest---Public Notice in question did not violate any of the provisions of Sindh Public Procurement Regulatory Authority Rules, 2010---Basic information according to R. 73 of Sindh Public Procurement Regulatory Authority Rules, 2010, contained about subject project, eligibility of participants, date of purchase of Expression of Interest document and the same could also be down loaded from Sindh Public Procurement Regulatory Authority website and last date of submission also---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances.

201. Suit 358/1985 Ghazanfar Ali and another V/S Cherat Cement Limited and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Suit for Declaration, Cancellation and Damages dismissed.)

[SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-116569]
Suit for Declaration, Cancellation and Damages dismissed.

202. Suit 752/1984 Cherat Cement Company Limited V/S Ghazanfar Ali & two others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC ( Suit for Recovery. Decreed.)

[SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-116568]
Two Suits i-e, Suit for Recovery filed by the plaintiff and suit for Declaration, Cancellation and Damages filed by the defendants were decided in a single judgment. The Suit of Plaintiff was decreed whereas the Suit of defendant was dismissed.

203. S.M.A 58/2013 Mrs. Atteeya Mahmood (Petitioner) V/S Nighat Muzaffar and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: S.M.A (Review Application dismissed)

[SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-116227]
The Objectors' counsel has failed to point out any error, factual or legal in the order dated 30-01-2017, sought to be reviewed by the present applicant. C.M.A dismissed.

204. Suit 611/2016 Abu Bakar Bin Abdul Qadir and another V/S Laeeq Ahmed and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Order Vii, Rule 11 C.P.C (Dismissed.)

2018 CLC Note 24 [SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-116012]
Defendants failed to make a case for grant of application under O. VII, R. 11, C.P.C.---Application was dismissed in circumstances.

205. Suit 74/1991 Mohammad Sarwar V/S Government of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Tort Law (), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Compensation.)

[SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-115794]
Custodial death, suit for recovery of compensation amount decreed.

206. Suit 101/1984 Karachi Properties Investment Company (Private) Limited V/S Karachi Properties Investment Company (1974) (Private) Limited and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC ( Suit for Recovery. Decreed.)

Once it has been admitted by the defendant that a huge amount rupees 9.3 Million was paid way back in 1978, which at the time was no doubt enormous amount, then onus on defendants to prove that either they paid back this amount to plaintiff or kept this amount in a separate account and it was never utilized in their other transactions. The Defendants failed to discharge their onus. Suit decreed.

207. S.M.A 230/2016 In the matter of Letter of Administration of deceased Tahir Ahmed Khan V/S Nil Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: International Law (), Civil Procedure Law (UAE) (), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Section 13.), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Section 44.)

2019 PLD Sindh 130, 2017 SBLR Sindh 2034 [SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-114787]
Pakistan Act 1990,UK Civil Procedure Law (UAE)

208. Suit 1661/2015 Dewan Steel Mills and others V/S Federation of Pakistan and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Anti Dumping Law ()

2018 PTD 668 [SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-114511]
Ant- Dumping Case: Concept of dumping explained. Section 31 Anti Dumping Act, 2015, explained. NTC not required to first give an independent decision or determination before delivering its preliminary determination. Concession of parties cannot confer jurisdiction on a Court. Suit barred in view of Section 70 of the Anti Dumping Act, 2015. Confidentiality issue to be considered by Appellate Forum. Information and database about prices of a product obtained from Customs Department, not confidential, unless otherwise barred by any statute or rule. Decisions of National Tariff Commission should not be resulting in creating directly or indirectly any monopoly or cartel of any business. Claim of confidentiality should be decided on the touchstone of Article 19A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, and Freedom of Information Ordinance, 2002. Role of National Tariff Commission is very significant vis-a-vis CPEC. NTC to ensure that local industry is not destroyed. Time enlarged for filing Appeal before the Appellate Authority. Case referred to National Tariff Commission.

209. Suit 2489/2016 M/s. Al Naseeb Welfare Foundation International V/S M/s. Latif Memorial Hospital & others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Order Vii, Rule 11 C.P.C (Allowed.)

2018 CLC 883
Suit for declaration---Rejection of plaint.

210. Const. P. 7097/2016 Karamat Ali and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Police Law (2011 Sindh Act), Police Law ( Police Act, 1861)

[SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-138628]
The principal statute regarding the police currently in force in Sindh is the Police Act, 1861 (Police Act), as revived and restored by the Sindh (Repeal of the Police Order, 2002 and Revival of the Police Act, 1861) Act, 2011 (2011 Sindh Act)

Matter:REVIVAL OF POLIC ACT

211. Suit 1367/2007 Muhammad Iqbal Dawood and another V/S Abdul Qayoom Hot and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Suit for Possession & Mesne Profit)

2018 YLR 1319 [SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-114896]
Suit for possession of immovable property and mesne profits. Suit Decreed

212. Suit 541/2007 MST. AMTUL FATIMA & ORS. V/S SYED TAHIR ALI JAFRI & ORS. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order XXI, Rule 85)

[SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-112438]
Order XXI, Rule 85. Application dismissed.

213. Suit 750/2016 Syed Farukh Mazhar V/S SGS Headquarters and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Injuction Applications (Injunciton Dismissed )

2018 PLD Sindh 327 [SHC Citation: 2017-SHC-KHI-112662]
Injunction dismissed.

214. Suit 1090/1991 Sunray Corporation (Private) Limited V/S M/s. Total Parco Marketing Ltd Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Tort Law (Recovery of Damages)

[SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-114894]
The Defendant in breach of its contractual obligation did not purchase the lubricants product from plaintiff. Suit decreed by awarding damages with markup rate of 12% from the date of institution of the suit till realization amount.

215. Const. P. 5812/2015 Shahrukh Shakeel Khan and others V/S Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-107534]
School Fees Judgement

216. Const. P. 6383/2015 Tehseen Muzammil and others V/S Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-107537]
School Fees, Schools who have increased their tuition fees over 5% per annum for the last three years from the date of their respective registration/reregistration, no further enhancement be permitted until their re-registration whereupon enhancement be regulated in strict compliance of Sub-rule 7 (3) of the Rules 2002

217. Suit 646/1999 KHAN JAMAL V/S M/S. LONG LIFE BUILDERS & ORS. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Suit for Declaration and Mesne profit)

Suit for Declaration & Mesne profit. Suit Decreed.

218. Const. P. 2524/2016 Ali Muhammad & another V/S Federation of Pakistan and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Building Control and Town Planning Regulations, 2011 ()

Registered sub-leases in respect of two apartment / units which were non-existent at the time of registration and even till the decision of the instant petition, have been directed to be cancelled by Nazir of Sindh High Court. It is an admitted position that these apartments are to be located at the third floor / story of the building which is not even constructed by the Builder. Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, cannot be construed so as to include an immovable property, which is not even existing at the time of registration. Property sought to be registered should be of ascertainable description. Similarly, Section 2, subsection (6) of the Registration Act, 1908, wherein an immovable property is defined, inter alia, means that an immovable property should be a tangible one and physically exists.

219. Suit 826/1987 M/S. MUSTAFA SONS PVT. LTD. V/S PORT QASIM AUTHORITY. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Recovery ), Companies matters ()

A suit instituted on behalf of a Plaintiff-Company without a valid authorization simply means that the plaint is not existing for all intents and purposes.

220. Suit 903/2007 Allah Dino Khaskheli V/S HBL Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-109885]
Damages employement HBL

221. Const. P. 3379/2016 Abdul Latif Shaikh V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Local Government Act (Election Matters)

2017 YLR 1174
An election for the reserved seat in a Municipal Committee without first filling up the vacant general seat in one of its Wards, will be an exercise in futility, as it will adversely affect the subsequent election of Chairman and Vice Chairman of that Municipal Committee. Consequently, in terms of Rule 47 of the Sindh Local Councils (Election) Rules, 2015, relating to electoral college should be complied with.

222. Const. P. 2199/2016 Haji Khan V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2017 CLC 1650
The eligibility criteria f a contesting candidate mentioned in the Sindh Government Act, 2013 (2013 Act), is to be interpreted keeping in view the basic concept of 2013 Act, which spells out that if a candidate is voter registered in an urban area, then he can only be elected for a Council falling within an urban area of the District as envisaged in Section 8 and 15 of the 2013 Act, including town committees; irrespective of the fact that a candidate is voter of the same district.

223. Const. P. 84/2016 Mst. Samina Pathan V/S National Database and Registration Authority [NADRA] Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (199)

2018 PLC Lab. 36 [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-106735]
Dismissal from service in undue haste and in violation of statutory service rules, can be assailed in a writ jurisdiction.

224. Const. P. 2105/2016 Mst. Bhalan V/S The Province of Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (199)

2017 PLC CS 80
Correction in date of birth---The petition is completely silent about the fact that what steps the petitioner took to get her official service record corrected, while she was in service. This apparent contradiction about date of birth is a pure question of factual controversy and cannot be resolved in a writ jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.---Even otherwise, issue at hand does not fall within the ambit of writ jurisdiction as it is barred under Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, as, inter alia, the subject dispute is about an order of retirement from service passed by the departmental authority, as envisaged in Section 2(a) of the Sindh Service Tribunal Act, 1973, and can be otherwise assailed before Service Tribunal in accordance with law.

225. Const. P. 198/2016 Abdul Majeed V/S NAB and others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: NAB ()

Bail Granted--- Petitioner was a Bank official and arrested by National Accountability Bureau on a complaint by manager of a private Bank that he, along with co-accused persons, misused their authority and misappropriated/embezzled funds of bank by illegally opening an imprest account---Validity---Fact that as to how much amount landed in pocket of petitioner as beneficiary was not highlighted. No loss was caused to public exchequer as matter pertained to a private Bank. Company in whose favour purported fake Letters of Guarantee were issued also did not come forward with their claim or complaint. Validity of Letters of Guarantee had expired. Under instruments, no fiscal fraud of cheating was committed. Prosecution had to still prove its case before Trial Court and therefore, case fell within established ingredients for grant of bail, as it was a case of further inquiry in order to prove guilt of petitioner.

226. Suit 13/1972 PREMIER INSURANCE CO. V/S KARACHI SHIPYARD & ENGINEERING V/S M/S. FAROOQI & CO., Surridge & Beecheano, ARFIN & CO., Abdul Rauf, Samiuddin Sami, H. A. Rahmani Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Recovery ), Tort Law ()

2017 YLR 1551
Marine Insurance Policy is assignable and consequently an Insurance Company after being subrogated, can sue the tortfeasor in its own name, in terms of Sections 130A read with 135A, of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

227. Const. P. 718/2012 Ali Hassan & Others V/S Government of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (199)

Mere issuance of conditional appointment letters that too for a contract employment, cannot be invoked for seeking a relief for issuance of writ of mandamus, when official respondents have categorically disputed the relationship of the employment.

228. Const. P. 846/2014 Abdul Haq and Others V/S The Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (199)

2017 YLR 242, 2017 YLR 424 [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-106727]
Constitutional petition---Claim of petitioner was disputed by respondents and Revenue Authorities---Due process of law---Applicability---Due process of law was of wide import and its applicability varied from case to case in accordance with the set of facts and circumstances---Due process of law was also directly related to the rights, interest and entitlement of a person as recognized by law---Petitioners could not make out a prime facie case of their legal entitlement of possession of suit property---Entries in the revenue record about their alleged claim were under scrutiny before the concerned authorities---Term "due process of law" was not applicable in circumstances---Constitutional petition was dismissed accordingly.

229. Const. P. 1519/2011 Abdul Ghafar V/S Govt of Sindh & ors Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (199)

2017 PLC CS 625 [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-SUK-112297]
Group Insurance being not part of inheritance (Tarka) and the same is payable to the nominee mentioned therein. Since, it is an admitted position as also supported by all documentary evidence, the present petitioner has been mentioned as nominee in the Nomination Form of State life Insurance Corporation, therefore, petitioner is entitled to amount of group insurance.---Rules 4.8, 4.9 and 4.10 of the West Pakistan Civil Services Pension Rules, 1963 are interpreted and pensionary benefits were allowed to the petitioner being a nominee.

230. Const. P. 4570/2015 Munir Ahmed V/S Federation of Pakistan and others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: NAB ()

[SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-SUK-112137]
Mere fact that petitioner opted for plea bargain, which was not even recommended by the NAB Authorities, or duly approved by the Accountability Court, cannot operate as a bar for withholding the bail, if the accused otherwise makes out a case for grant of bail on merits.

231. Suit 749/1989 Rice Export Corporation of Pakistan V/S Mohammad Alam Sindh High Court, Karachi 2016 CLC 1326, 2016 CLD 2106
Import and applicability of Sections 151 and 161 of the Contract Act [1872] has been discussed [things speak for themselves]. Defendant has been held liable to compensate Plaintiff for the losses it suffered.

232. Suit 1410/2013 Toyoshima & Co. limited V/S Shadman Cotton mills limited Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Territorial Jurisdiction)

[SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-106766]
Territorial jurisdiction of Sindh High Court was questioned by Defendant, primarily on the ground that Defendant-Company has been shifted from Karachi to Lahore, therefore, a foreign company / Plaintiff cannot enforce an International Arbitral Award by filing a suit in Sindh High Court. The crucial documentary evidence shows that when the suit proceeding was filed for enforcement of the Award under Section 6 of the Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act, 2011, the Defendant had its registered office in Karachi and even Annual Report of the Company also shows that the Management notice for convening the Annual General Meeting was also to be held at Karachi. Consequently, it has been held, that Sindh High Court has jurisdiction in the matter.

233. Adm. Suit 287/1990 Jugolinifa V/S Sayeed A.Tayyab Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: ADMIRALTY ()

2016 SBLR Sindh 1651 [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-138873]
Suit filed by unauthorized person---Defect in filing proceeding was incurable, hence, suit was dismissed

Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT

234. Suit 796/1987 V/S Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Contract Act (), Civil Procedure Code CPC ()

2016 CLC 1326, 2016 SBLR Sindh 967
No party is allowed to set up a new case in evidence, which is beyond his pleadings

235. Suit 456/1988 MUHAMMAD WAJID KHAN. V/S M/S. ATTOCK CEMENT FAC. PAK. LTD. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Tort Law (), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Damages)

2016 CLC 1063 [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-106094]
A remedy available to a person under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, cannot operate as an absolute bar for seeking a remedy under an ordinary civil jurisdiction by filing a suit.The Defendants, who are Employer [Client], Contractor and sub-contractors, respectively, were jointly and severally held liable to pay damages for the negligent acts, which caused the Plaintiff serious injury and partial disability of permanent nature. Damages have been awarded by invoking the principle of composite negligence.

236. Suit 378/1987 Habib Jute Mills Limited V/S The Islamic Republic of Pakistan and another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: ADMIRALTY (), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Suit for Recovery, Dismissed.)

2017 CLC 1783
Admiralty suit dismissed (Being filed by unauthorized person)

237. Const. P. 424/2016 Shabbir Ahmed V/S Chairman NAB and others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

Topic: NAB ()

2017 MLD 200
NAB Case: Recovery of 'amount due'---Willful default---Quashing of proceedings.

238. Suit 268/1980 Trading Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd V/S V/S Muhammad ASLAM SIDDIQUI & ORS Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC ( Accounts & Recovery)

2016 CLD 2106
Suit for Recovery---Decreed

239. Suit 176/1985 Trading Corporation of Pakistan Ltd V/S Haji Khuda Bux Amir Umer ltd Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Companies matters ()

2016 CLC 878, 2017 CLC 1387
If the very suit has been unauthorizedly and incompetently filed, that is, neither any authorization from the Board of Directors exists, nor the Articles of Association provide such authority, then such a defect remains incurable, even by a subsequent ratification.

240. H.C.A 103/1988 Dr. Zaki Hassan & ors. V/S Mst. Hajra Bai Mohammad Sindh High Court, Karachi
Appeal against decretal of Suit for Specific Performance dismissed.

Matter:AGAINST ORDER

241. Suit 871/1987 MUHAMMAD HABIB V/S HUMAYOON LTD. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Specific Performance (Refused), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Compensation.)

2017 SBLR Sindh 202 [SHC Citation: 2016-SHC-KHI-106078]
At all material times, the said Defendant No.1 was ready and willing to perform its contractual obligation and in pursuance thereof it got evicted different portions of the suit property from respective tenants, dismantling a Petrol Pump as well, which was being run by the said Defendant No.1. In this regard, correspondences were exchanged between the said Defendant No.1 and Plaintiff, wherein, the former has offered the latter to take the possession of the suit property together with Defendant No.4 as tenant but Plaintiffs who were planning to use the suit property for a commercial venture by constructing a multi-storied project, refused to accept the offer of the Defendant No.1 and consequently, the above mentioned main Agreement had become impossible to be performed and consequently was terminated.

242. Execution 25/2012 Askari Bank Ltd. V/S A.H. International (Pvt) Ltd. & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Execution. )

2016 YLR 1436
Transfer of property made in clear violation of Section 23 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, is void.

243. J.M 62/2015 M/s. Shahtaj Textile Lmited. V/S Standard Chartered Bank (Pakistan) Ltd., & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (12 (2) CPC)

2016 SBLR Sindh 594 [SHC Citation: 2015-SHC-KHI-138951]
If triable issues are not involved, which required leading and recording of evidence, then it is not mandatory to frame issues and an application under Section 12(2) of C.P.C. can be decided on the basis of available case record and undisputed facts. Ratable distribution under Section 73 read with Order XXXIV Rule 13 of Civil procedure Code; Bank having a mortgage decree in its favour has a preferential status over a money decree, which is in favour of Plaintiff.

Matter:APPLICATION U/S 12(2)

244. Const. P. 2293/2014 V/S Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (199)

Different agreements entered into between an Oil Marketing Company as a lessee / tenant of a property, with its Franchisee or other person(s), in particular, for NFR [non-fuel retail] business, is subservient to the main lease agreement being a registered document, entered into between an Oil Marketing Company and owner / lessor of a property. Therefore, for such agreements a written no objection is not necessarily required from landlord / lessor, but only from the concerned government functionary.

245. Suit 241/2008 MRS. ZAREENA V/S ISLAM UDDIN & OTHERS. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC (Section 11)

2016 YLR Note 133
Principle of res judicata as envisaged under Section 11 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, can in appropriate cases be made applicable to the interlocutory orders as well, particularly to forestall the abuse of process of Court, which is apparent from the conduct of the parties.

246. Const. P. 4404/2014 Syed Dost Ali V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (199)

2016 SBLR Sindh 162 [SHC Citation: 2015-SHC-KHI-103304]
* In exceptional circumstances the writ jurisdiction under article 199 of the Constitution can be invoked, despite availability of an alternate remedy. * Excessive use of unlawful powers is itself unlawful.

247. Const. P. 618/2012 Nasrullah Domki V/S SHO PS Saddar Jacobabad and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2016 PLD 238 [SHC Citation: 2015-SHC-LRK-100703]
Nasrullah Const.p: Petitions No. S- 618 of 2012.S-65, 74, 79, 134, 164, 226, 284, 337, 697, 814,834, 845, 932 and 1079 of 2015.

248. Const. P. 344/2015 M/s. Haider Industries and others V/S Federation of Pakistan Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2015-SHC-KHI-97572]
Regulatory Duty

249. Const. P. 3968/2013 Hussain Coal Mines V/S Director General Mines Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Mining Concessions Rules, 2002 (grant and extension of lease)

Through aforesaid petitions, the petitioners have impugned Notification(s) dated 24.9.2013, whereby, Mining Permits of Coal issued in favour of the petitioners, which were valid up to 19.8.2011, have been cancelled/withdrawn.

250. S.M.A 183/2014 Rabia Saleem V/S Non Sindh High Court, Karachi
S.M.A granted with directions to the Nazir to act as Administrator for distribution of estate left by deceased among the legal heirs.

251. Const. P. 2829/2010 M/s.Iqbal & Sons V/S CDGK through DCO & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2010-SHC-KHI-61016]
Sindh Public Procurement Rules, 2010.

Latest Case Law
I. A 7/2017 United Bank Limited V/S Ghulam Rafiq Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 CLD 129
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 8542/2018 Sukkur Beverages (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 CLD 110
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 882/2019 M/s Mediflow Pharmaceuticals (Pvt) Ltd V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 MLD 185
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 881/2019 Otsuka Pakistan Ltd V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 MLD 185
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 8726/2018 Riaz Ahmed V/S NED University of Engineering & Tech & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 MLD 114
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1264/2018 Master Motor Corp. (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 CLC 117, 2019 SBLR Sindh 709
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 3552/2017 Master Motor Corp. (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 CLC 117, 2019 SBLR Sindh 709
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1412/2015 Sajjad Hussain and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 SBLR Sindh 156
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Service matters (Contempt ), Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)
Const. P. 688/2010 Rehmatullah and others V/S Prov. of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 53
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Bar of Jurisdiction )
Const. P. 846/2015 CDR (R) Mansoob Ali Khan V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1444
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aziz-ur-Rehman, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Bar of Jurisdiction )
Const. P. 4997/2017 Muhammad Azam Channa V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1533
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (transfer and posting)
Const. P. 2508/2018 Aftab Muhammad Khan V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1483
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Contract employee)
Const. P. 1001/2016 Ahsanullah Lakho V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 51
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Suspension )
Const. P. 2074/2017 Nabi Bux Jamali V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 49
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Date of Birth )
Const. P. 6548/2016 Bibi Hajra V/S The Trustees of the Port of Karachi & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC Lab. 233
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Contempt )
Const. P. 649/2013 Mst. Sahib Khatoon V/S Province of Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
2019 PLC (CS) 1408
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Const. P. 6251/2016 Shaikh Muhammad Suleman V/S Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited & another Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 418, 2019 PLC (CS) 1381
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Shaheed compensation)
Const. P. 3238/2013 Ghulam Ali Gopang V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1354
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Upgradation)
Const. P. 608/2015 Sajjad Hussain And ors V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1324
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Removal from Service)
Const. P. 4652/2013 Salman Sabir V/S M/s Pakistan Steel and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 46
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Bar of Jurisdiction )
Const. P. 994/2014 Arshad Ali V/S D.G CHO, Rawalpindi and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 44
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Salary)
Const. P. 5262/2013 M/s Inland Textile Mills Ltd V/S Mehdi Khan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC Lab. 182
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)
Const. P. 4930/2015 Musheer Ahmed and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1278
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Appointment)
Const. P. 3472/2012 M. Afzal Kausar V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1258
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Section 3 of Sindh Regularization Act, )
Const. P. 2598/2016 Rashid Ali Memon V/S Chief Sect: and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1245
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Out of turn promotion)
Const. P. 6666/2016 Majid Anwar Seehar V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 40
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Cost of Living Allowance (CLA) )
Const. P. 3491/2013 Lal Badshah And Ors V/S Chairman K.P.T And Ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1231
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Repatriation)
Const. P. 1389/2016 Anwar Ali V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1217
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Promotion)
Const. P. 4132/2017 Shahnawaz Khatri V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1209
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Dismissal-Termination)
Const. P. 4377/2012 Dr. Itrat Malik V/S State Life Insurance Co-opration & ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 1861
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (statutory or non statutory rules of service)
Const. P. 4268/2018 Ghulam Rabbani V/S Governor, State Bank of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 1817
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Promotion)
Const. P. 544/2013 Ali Zahir Jafri V/S Chairman Federal Board of Revenue and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PTD 1765
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
H.C.A (Maintainability of the Suit)
H.C.A 317/2018 Mussawar Ali V/S Province of Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1670
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Pension matters)
Const. P. 4177/2016 Parveen Shoukat V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLD SC 710, 2018 PLC (CS) Note 118
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Pension matters)
Const. P. 5798/2014 Anwery Begum V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 572
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Back benefits)
Const. P. 1842/2015 Irshad Ahmed V/S Chairman Port Qasim Authority and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 557
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Const. P. 7908/2015 Shankar Lal V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1196
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (transfer and posting)
Const. P. 635/2018 M/S Gerry V/S Learned Member NIRC & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC Lab. 63
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Promotion), Service matters (Seniority)
Const. P. 2268/2017 Attaullah Khan Chandio V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1157
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Contract employee)
Const. P. 6911/2017 Imtiaz Ahmed Barakzai V/S Federal Tax Ombudsman and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1145
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (transfer and posting)
Const. P. 1610/2018 Syed Ghulam Abbas Shah V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1114
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Pension matters)
Const. P. 3415/2017 Dr. Uzma Shaheen Pirzada V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1100
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Promotion)
Const. P. 253/2015 Faraz Sherwani and ors V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1084
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Promotion)
Const. P. 4257/2016 Ahsan Ali Shah and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 1050
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
H.C.A (reinstatement in service)
H.C.A 239/2016 Allah Dino Khaskheli V/S Zakir Mehmood & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 999
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Appointment)
Const. P. 1929/2014 Sikandar Ali Shah and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 962
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Dismissal-Termination)
Const. P. 4942/2017 Muhammad Ayub Alvi V/S Admin Incharge P.C.S.I & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 917
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Const. P. 3408/2013 Zafar Iqbal Zahid and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 882
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Medical facilities )
Const. P. 631/2018 Shah Abul Hassan V/S Fed of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 839
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Deceased quota)
Const. P. 5307/2015 Mst. Nazima Khatoon V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 817
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Dismissal-Termination)
Const. P. 2377/2017 Atif Hussain V/S Sect: Ministry of Textile Ind. and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 791
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Seniority)
Const. P. 8265/2017 Majid Akhtar V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 771
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Back benefits)
Const. P. 2520/2014 Syed Faisal Ali and ors V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) 751
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Date of Birth )
Const. P. 615/2017 Rana Muhammad Rasheed V/S SLAT and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC Lab. 115
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Compensation)
Const. P. 1885/2015 M/s CIM Shipping Inc V/S Tousif Ahmed and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC Lab. 121
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Const. P. 78/2017 Oil Industries Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd V/S Ghulam Fareed Bhatti and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC Lab. 140
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Contract employee)
Const. P. 6555/2016 Maj (R) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SCMR 984
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Back benefits), Service matters (Promotion)
Const. P. 634/2013 M. Iqbal V/S Chairman NAB and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 25
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Mid Career Management Course )
Const. P. 8306/2017 Mushtaq Ahmed Shaikh V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 20
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Appointment)
Const. P. 1377/2014 Akmal Hussain V/S Secretary Establishment Government of Pakistan and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2018 SBLR Sindh 128, 2019 PLC (CS) 2013
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
C.P (Rent matters) (Order 1 Rule 10 CPC)
Const. P. 1144/2017 Amir S/o Abdul Zahoor V/S Nasir Ahmed & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 85
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Promotion)
Const. P. 2288/2016 Ms. Azra Muqeem V/S KMC & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 2
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Appointment)
Const. P. 6221/2015 Rab Nawaz V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 5
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Reinstatement into service)
Const. P. 4053/2016 Syed Maqbool Hussain Zaidi V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 14
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)
Const. P. 3759/2017 Kamran Ahmed Mallah V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC (CS) Note 41
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Const. P. 1355/2019 The Searle Co. Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1354/2019 Hakimsons (Impex) Pvt Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1185/2019 Martin Dow Market (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 940/2019 M/s Epla Laboratories (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 695/2019 Martin Dow Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 939/2019 M/s Tabros Pharma (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 917/2019 M/s Indus Pharma (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 401/2019 M/s Barrett Hodgson Pak (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 400/2019 M/s OBS Pakistan Pvt Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 399/2019 Sanofi Aventis Pak Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 87/2013 United Mobile & Others V/S Abdul Rauf Essa & another Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1979, 2019 CLD 1267
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 86/2013 United Mobile and Others V/S Abdul Rauf Essa and another Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1979, 2019 CLD 1267
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 359/2018 Shahnawaz Jalil V/S Rani & Company & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 1338
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 87/2013 United Mobile & Others V/S Abdul Rauf Essa & another Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1979, 2019 CLD 1267
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 86/2013 United Mobile and Others V/S Abdul Rauf Essa and another Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1979, 2019 CLD 1267
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 2762/2011 Ahmed Jamil Ansari V/S Govt. of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 2077
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 408/2011 Saleem Shehzada V/S Province of Sindh & Ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 2077
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 4479/2018 M/s Universal Brothers (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 YLR 2561, 2019 SBLR Sindh 2158
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 5998/2019 Hassan Raza V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 2348
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
I. A 221/2017 Khurram Shehzad V/S United Bank Ltd. Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 1205
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1257/2017 Abdul Qadeer Khan Durrani V/S State Bank of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 1228
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 2011/2018 Energy Solution (Pvt) Ltd V/S The President of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1639, 2019 CLD 1194
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 398/2019 Pfizer Pakistan Pvt Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1849
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Civil Revision 59/2016 Dr. Bhagwandas & Others V/S Mashooq Ali Jatoi & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
2019 CLC Note 58
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 4479/2018 M/s Universal Brothers (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 YLR 2561, 2019 SBLR Sindh 2158
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
LIMITATION (Limitation Act 1908)
I. A 82/2018 Mrs. Asma Hassan & another V/S Askari Bank Limited Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 2030
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 7326/2018 Mst. Ayesha V/S Banking Mohtasib and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 1966
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 2819/2016 Faysal Bank Ltd V/S Banking Mohtasib of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 1966
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
I. A 74/2018 Intekhab Hussain Shah V/S National Bank of Pakistan Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 1021
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 2011/2018 Energy Solution (Pvt) Ltd V/S The President of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1639, 2019 CLD 1194
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1554/2016 M/s.East West Insurance Co V/S Fed Insurance Ombudsman & another Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLD Sindh 557, 2019 CLD 993
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1554/2016 M/s.East West Insurance Co V/S Fed Insurance Ombudsman & another Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLD Sindh 557, 2019 CLD 993
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 2165/2012 M/s. Naushero Feroz-I CNG Station V/S Federation of Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 YLR 2198, 2019 SBLR 346
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order XXI Rule 89& 26 CPC)
Civil Revision 70/2016 Syed Abdul Ahad V/S Abdul Shakoor and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 146
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Election Appeal 8/2016 Haji Arz Mohammad Brohi V/S Election Commission of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
2019 YLR 2098
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Election Appeal 1/2017 Fahad Ali V/S D.R.O. Sanghar and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
2019 CLC 1496
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1057/2018 Board of Secondary Education V/S Provincial Ombudsman Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1531
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
I. A 16/2014 Syed Najamuddin Hussain & another V/S Askari Bank Limited Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 901
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
I. A 14/2015 Nazli Hilal Rizvi V/S Bank Al-Falah Ltd. & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 808
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 3355/2018 Jehanzeb and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PTD 1702
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 3354/2018 Khitab Khan and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PTD 1702
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 3353/2018 Ikramullah and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PTD 1702
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Civil Tran 28/2016 Rashid V/S Mst. Farah Naz Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
2019 CLC 1384
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
I. A 111/2018 Muhammad Asif V/S M. C. B. Bank Limited & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 733
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
I. A 60/2015 M/s. P. M. Packages & others V/S Silk Bank Ltd. Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 713
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 79/2017 Qadir Bux @ Ghulam Shabir V/S Federation of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
2019 YLR 1844
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Election Appeal 1/2018 Ghulam Muhammad V/S Election Commission Of Pakistan and Other Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
2019 CLC 1173
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
I.T.R.A 198/2011 Pakistan Mercantile Exchange V/S Comm, Inland Revenue Zon-1 Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PTD 1463
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 425/2016 Asif Seemab Sindhu V/S Administrator, DHA and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1295
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 20/2017 Mrs. Humaira Imran. V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLD Sindh 467
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order XXIX R, 1), Injuction Applications ()
II.A. 85/2014 M/s. Pakistan Reinsurance Company V/S Trustees of the Potr of Karachi (KPT) Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1339
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order 1 Rule 10 CPC)
Civil Revision 76/2015 Fozia Rahat V/S Masood Ahmed & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1323
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Const. P. 2036/2016 Salim Ahmed & Another V/S Nasim Imtiaz and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1266

C.P (Rent matters) (SRPO, 1979)
Const. P. 2036/2016 Salim Ahmed & Another V/S Nasim Imtiaz and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1266
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
C.P (Rent matters) ()
Const. P. 1295/2018 Makhdoom Hussam-ul-Haq V/S Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1063
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Specific Performance (), Civil Procedure Code CPC (Specific Performance of Contract )
II.A. 21/2011 Mst. Kishwar Begum & Ors V/S Rasheed Ahmed Qureshi & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1044
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Const. P. 8784/2017 Shahnaz Parveen V/S The Additional District Judge-III, Karachi East & 3 others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1008
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 369/2018 M/s. Ismail Industries Limited V/S Mondelez International & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 1029
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 270/2017 Muslim Commercial Bank Ltd. V/S Haji Jan Mohammad & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLD Sindh 312
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 2070/2017 Muhammad Yaqoob V/S Province Of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
2019 YLR 1507
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 15/2012 Securities & Exchange Commission of Pakistan V/S Adnan Faisal & Ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLD Sindh 235, 2019 CLD 242
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 2110/2009 Muhammad Tariq Qasmi V/S Federation of Pakistan & ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 PLC CS 594
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 333/2016 Delhi Mercantile Muslim Cooperative Housing Society Limited Karachi V/S Alamgir Welfare Trust International and another Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 YLR 1167
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 563/2011 Shahmir Solangi & Ors V/S P.S. Sindh through Secretary & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 433
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nisar Muhammad Shaikh
Const. P. 333/2016 Mian Syed Hussain and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 NLR Note 202020
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Cr.Misc. 210/2017 muhammad anwar qureshi V/S muhammad ayoob & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
2019 YLR 839
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 165/2017 Imran Modi V/S Mizhar Uddin (Farooqui) & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 YLR 874
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 207/2016 M/s. Karachi Water & Sewerage Board & another V/S Muhammad Ali Khan Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 718
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
H.C.A 411/2016 M/s. Zaidi Enterprises V/S Civil Aviation & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 792
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
I. A 3/2013 Soofi Rice Mills & Others V/S N.B.P & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
2019 CLD 395
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 733/2017 Faqirullah V/S D.G Pakistan Public and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 720
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 3552/2017 Master Motor Corp. (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 CLC 117, 2019 SBLR Sindh 709
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Const. P. 1264/2018 Master Motor Corp. (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2020 CLC 117, 2019 SBLR Sindh 709
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Suit 75/2017 M/s. Rashid Silk Mills. V/S Sui Southern Gas Co., Limited. Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 617
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Suit 735/2001 KPT Officers Cooperative Housing Society Limited V/S Government of Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 826

Const. P. 5795/2018 Hakeem Naseem Ahmed Siddiqui (Qasmi) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 893
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Cr.Acctt.A 33/2001 Abdul Sattar Dero. V/S The State. Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 478
Hon'ble Judge Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Hon'ble Senior Pusine Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
Const. P. 5115/2017 Khurram Ahmed V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 368
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Const. P. 5104/2017 Zeeshan Javed & 6 others V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 MLD 368
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
H.C.A 413/2017 Vaqar Ahson V/S Zulfiqar Mohammad & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 475
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
H.C.A 421/2016 Al-Tamash Medical Society V/S Dr. Anwar Ye BIn Ju & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLC 1
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Const. P. 5101/2015 Lt. Col. Syed Jawaid Ahmed V/S Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 459
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Const. P. 1914/2015 Wali Muhammad Shaikh V/S Federation of Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 205
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Const. P. 2939/2011 Dr. Ashfaq Ahmed Tunio & others V/S Federal Investigation Agency & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 SBLR Sindh 1
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
Const. P. 3710/2018 M/s Cresent Star Insurance Ltd and Ors V/S SECP and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
2019 CLD 134
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Judicial Companies Misc. 33/2014 M/s. Symmetry Digital (Pvt.) Ltd. V/S Securities & Exchange Commission of Pakistan Sindh High Court, Karachi
2018 CLD 1493, 2019 SBLR Sindh 504
Approved for Reporting
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Suit 1826/2017 The Stillman V/S S. M. A