Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2759 2004 SLD 2759 2004 PLD 439
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 530 of 2000, decided on 3rd March, 2004, dates of hearing: 11th, 22nd, 28th April, 2003 and 9th February, 2004.
MUSHIR ALAM, J
Akhtar Hussain for Plaintiff. Khalid Rehman for Defendant No. 1. Nizam Ali Khan for Defendant No. 2. Nemo for Defendant No. 3. Data S. Shaikh for Defendant No. 4.

Dr. Pro. HAROON AHMED --Plaintiff

VS

Messrs BRITISH AIRWAYS and 3 others ----Defendants

Law:

Section:

(a) Damages--- --------Kinds of---Action for damages, arising out of international contract of carriage by air, either on account of statutory liability under the Warsaw Convention as enacted through municipal law or breach of contract, or under general law of land or the tort, rules governing 'assessment and award of damages are common---Damages are usually considered under two heads viz. general or non-pecuniary loss or damages, that is physical injury, pain and suffering, impaired capacity for the enjoyment of life or lessened capacity and special or pecuniary damages that are actual, incidental and direct expense, capable of calculation in term of monetary value may it be on account of medical treatment, loss in business profit earning or otherwise. Muhammad Ishaq v. Metropolitan. Corporation PLD 1996 SC 737; Pakistan International Airlines Corporation v. Ali Raza Rizvi 1996 CLC 627; Abdul Qadir v. S.K. Abbas Hussain PLD 1997 Kar 566 and Mrs. Rahat Ali v. Dr. Saeeda Rehman 2002 CLC 96 ref (b) Contract Act (IX of 1872)----- ----S. 73---Compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract---Consequential loss suffered on account of denied boarding--­Damages---Assessment---Provision of S.73, Contract Act, 1872 is instructive to assess the damages on account of breach, which naturally arose in the usual course of the event of breach of contract or failure to discharge obligations resembling those created by the, contract---Any remote or indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of such breach is not favoured by law---Illustration (r) to S.73, Contract Act, 1872 is quite illustrative in the context of the case as regard claim of refund of air fair as well as consequential loss suffered on account of denied boarding. (c) Damages--- ---- Burden of proof---Held, in action for damages either general or special, burden to prove is always on the plaintiff. (d) Contract Act (IX of 1872)--- ----S. 73---Denied boarding and breach of international contract of carriage by air---Damages---Quantum---Principles. Plaintiff's case was that he is a doctor and a senior professor of Psychiatry, renowned nationally and internationally for his philanthropic work. Plaintiff…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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