Law:

Section:

State Immunity Ordinance, 1981 (VI of 1981)-- ----S. 4--Dismissal of writ petition--Jurisdiction--Matter was settled out of Court--Stance of petitioner--Challenge to--Case of petitioner is that civil Court was having no jurisdiction to entertain and try suit against petitioner--Stance of petitioner holds ground that law has incorrectly been applied while dismissing petition filed before High Court is correct in facts and circumstances of this case--Matter between parties stand resolved out of Court, it would become an academic exercise to give any finding on issue of state immunity--Petition allowed. [Pp. 148 ,  149] A, B ,  C ORDER Amin-ud-Din Khan, J.--We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Sajid Ilyas Bhatti, Additional Attorney General present before us. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that actually the matter has been settled out of the Court and the plaintiff/respondent has withdrawn his suit on 10.12.2016. The only question for which this Court has been approached is that the learned High Court has wrongly applied the State Immunity Ordinance No. VI of 1981 and Section 4 thereof. The case of the petitioner before the trial Court as well as High Court and this Court is that the civil Court was having no jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit against the petitioner, under the contract between the parties in the light of Clause 16 of General Conditions of Contract which contains…

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