| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 1588 2019 SLD 1588 2019 YLR 1402 |
Peshawar High Court
F.A.O. No. 13-A of 2018, decision & hearing Dated: 23-11-2018.
SYED MUHAMMAD ATTIQUE SHAH, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Malik Mahmood Akhtar
Respondent(s) by: Junaid Anwar Khan
F.A.O. No. 13-A of 2018, decision & hearing Dated: 23-11-2018.
SYED MUHAMMAD ATTIQUE SHAH, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Malik Mahmood Akhtar
Respondent(s) by: Junaid Anwar Khan
SNGPL ABBOTTABAD THROUGH REGIONAL MANAGER
VS
AHZAZ CNG STATION AND 2 OTHERS
Law: Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, (XI of 2016)
Section: 13(6)
Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act (XI of 2016)--- ----S. 13(6)--- Appeal against inter-locutory order--- Maintainability---Appellant assailed order of Gas Utility Court whereby it allowed respondent's application for restoration of gas supply---Validity---Trial Court had disposed of application of respondent and not the main suit, which fell within the ambit of S.13(6), Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, 2016---Appeal against interlocutory order being not main-tainable was dismissed. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: SYED MUHAMMAD ATTIQUE SHAH, J.--- SNGPL, through Regional Manager has challenged the validity of order dated 15.09.2018 passed by learned Gas Utility Court Mansehra, whereby the appellant (SNGPL) was directed to reconnect the gas supply as well as de-sealing of gas equipment of Ahzaz CNG subject to payment of 40% of disputed amount. The appellant has also challenged the validity of order dated 02.10.2018 whereby the request of the appellant for adjournment was turned down and evidence of the appellant was closed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that appellant filed a suit against the respondents for recovery of Rs. 23279882/- along with 10% monthly surcharge before the learned Gas Utility Court, Mansehra. The suit was contested by the respondents by filing their written statement. During pendency of the suit, respondent Adil Khan moved an application dated 09.12.2015 for issuance of direction to the appellants to reconnect his gas supply which application was contested by the appellant. The learned trial court, vide the impugned order, accepted the said application of the respondent/ defendant, hence the instant civil revision. 3. Today, at the very outset of the proceedings, learned counsel representing the respondents have challenged the very maintainability of present FAO being filed against an interlocutory order and is thus barred by Section 13(6) of the Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, 2016 and requested for its dismissal. 4. Learned counsel for…
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