Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.VII,R.11

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.VII,R.11

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 149,116

Limitation Act (IX of 1908)-------Arts. 116 & 149--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXVII, R.2 & O. VII, R.11---Suit for recovery of money as compensation for breach of contract---Trial Court rejected the plaint on the ground of limitation---Validity---Suit was filed by plaintiff eleven years after the breach of the contract or accrual of cause of action whereas suit for compensation for breach of contract in writing, registered or unregistered, had to be instituted within six years---Present suit fell within the definition of a suit as given under Art.116 of the Limitation Act, 1908---Article 149 of the Limitation Act, 1908 being a residual Article, would not apply to the present case in presence of specific Article of Limitation Act, 1908 applicable to the suit---Suit was time-­barred-Trial Court rightly rejected the plaint---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Union of India v. R.C. Jall of Indore and another and AIR 1958 Madhya Pradesh 425 and Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Defence, Rawalpindi through Station Commander (HQ) Sialkot v. Muhammad Bashir PLD 2005 Lah. 177 distinguished. Babar Ali, Standing Counsel for Appellants. Nemo for the Respondents. Proceeded ex parte vide order dated 30-9-2010. Date of hearing: 20th December, 2010. JUDGMENT IJAZ AHMAD, J.---- The decree dated 22-11-1999, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Rawalpindi, is impugned whereby in the suit for recovery of Rs.54,87,738.48, instituted by the appellants, the plaint was rejected. 2. There was a written contract, dated 15-6-1987, between the parties for supply of the Pulse. After elapse of the delivery period, a second purchase contract, dated 9-6-1988, was awarded to Messrs Naveed Industries, Lahore. The respondent is said to have partly failed to fulfil his contractual liability. The appellants had to incur an additional expenditure to purchase the remaining quantity from the open market. The appellants instituted a suit for recovery of Rs.54,87,738.48 against the respondent, as compensation for breach of the contract in question. The respondent made an application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. for rejection of the plaint contending that the appellants' suit…

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