Case Details

Citation(s)
1975 SLG 344 1975 SLD 344 1975 SCMR 520
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 37-R of 1975, decision dated: 23rd May 1975.(On appeal from the order of Sind & Baluchistan High Court, dated 18th February 1975 in Suit No. 263 of 1968)
HAMOODUR RAHMAN C.J. AND MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, J
S. M. Mahboob, Advocate instructed by Rana Magbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents

MESSRS NAURING RICE SYNDICATE THROUGH ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR, KARACHI

VS

MESSRS UNITED BANK, NAPIER ROAD, KARACHI

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-----O. XXI, r. 23-A-Execution proceedings-Security-Petition chal­lenging validity of order for furnishing security-Order passed on 1-t0-73 and petition filed on 18-4-75-Petition being hopelessly barred by time and there being no prayer for condonation of delay, objection, held, not entertainable- Petition even if treated as one for leave to appeal from order dated 18-4-75, rejecting prayer for extension of time to furnish security, order being purely discretionary order no ground, held, existed for interference by Supreme Court- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3). (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- -- O. XXI, r. 23-A read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)-Nothing on record showing order either unjust or unreason­able, or arbitrary-Two extensions already granted and on third occa­sion prayer for further extension rejected-High Court, held, would grant extension if satisfied as to sincerity of petitioner in his efforts in furnishing security-No reason for Supreme Court to interfere. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J. The respondent bank filed a Civil Suit (No 263 of 1969) against the petitioner-syndicate in the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, Karachi, for the recovery of Rs. 53,401.75 under Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code. The petitioner contested the suit but ultimately on the 8th September 1970, its counsel consented to a decree being passed for the entire amount of the claim with interest and costs. In accordance with this decree, a sum of Rs. 10.000 was to be paid within 15 days and thereafter the balance of the decretal amount was to be paid in instalments of Rs. 2,000 per month. The petitioner also gave an undertaking that be would not dispose of or otherwise encumber its properties. The properties were, however, not attached. The petitioner-syndicate paid a sum of Rs.26,811 but thereafter defaulted in making payment of the balance of decretal amount. Execution proceed­ings were, accordingly, initiated by the respondent-Bank on the 4th September 1972. The petitioner-syndicate filed objections to the execution of the decree on 11th August 1973, alleging that the decree had been…
🔒
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