| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 3393 2007 SLD 3393 2007 PLJ 782 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.P. No. 2717 of 2005, decided 22.3.2007.
NASIR-UL-MULK & CH. IJAZ AHMED, JJ.
Syed Najam-ul-Hassan Kazmi, ASC for Petitioner. Ch. M. Anwar Khan, AOR for
Respondent.
C.P. No. 2717 of 2005, decided 22.3.2007.
NASIR-UL-MULK & CH. IJAZ AHMED, JJ.
Syed Najam-ul-Hassan Kazmi, ASC for Petitioner. Ch. M. Anwar Khan, AOR for
Respondent.
VS
UNITED SUGAR MILLS LIMITED---Respondent
Law:
Section:
Arbitration Act, 1940 (X of 1940)-- ----Ss. 30, 33 & 39--Law Reforms Ordinance, (XII of 1972), S. 3--Format agreement executed between parties--Dispute between parties--Matter before Arbitrator--Appreciation of evidence--Controversy after judicial application of mind--Principal in various pronouncement--Appellate Court has to decide the appeal after independent application of mind and mere reproduction of the of trial Court--Findings of the Courts below on the whole reasonable are not arrived at by disregarding of any provision of law or any accepted principle concerning appreciation of evidence. [Pp. 785 & 786] A, B & D PLD 1964 SC 829 & PLD 1983 SC 53. (ii) General Clauses Act, 1897 (X of 1897)-- ----S. 24-A--Public functionaries are duty bound to decide the applications of citizens while exercising statutory power with reasons after judicial application of mind. [P. 785] C 1998 SCMR 2268 and PLD 1970 SC 758. Judgment Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, J.--The brief facts out of which the present petition arises are that the petitioner was the owner of Pasroor Sugar Mills. In pursuance to the policy of the Government of the Punjab petitioner has advertised for sale in the press qua the project in question (Pasroor Sugar Mills) in July, 1984. Respondent participated in the auction proceedings. Ultimately an agreement arrived between petitioner and respondent through negotiations among the banks and Pakistan Banking Council in the following terms:-- "(i) PSM was to be sold on the basis of fixed assets and the shares to be transferred to Respondent against a notional value of Rupee One only. (ii) Current assets of PSM were to be sold to the Respondent separately. (iii) Petitioner would receive a fixed sum of Rs. 3,00,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crores only), against its equity and investment in PSM, which would be paid by the respondent, within a period of ten (10) years, with two (2) years grace period. The payment was to be secured by a bank guarantee. (iv) Respondent was to enter into a separate agreement with PBC and NFDC for assuming and taking over the total liabilities of PSM towards the financial institutions. These were fixed at Rs. 20,00,00,000/- (Rupees…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492