| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 155 2024 SLD 155 2024 CLD 100 |
Lahore High Court
F.A.O. No. 73598 of 2021, decided on 15th February, 2022.Dates of hearing: 10th and 15th February, 2022.
Before Shujaat Ali Khan, J
Hafeez ur Rehman Ch. assisted by Noor Dad Chaudhry for Appellants. Rana Shamshad Khan, Additional Advocate General with Ms. Rashida Batool, Registrar of Firm, Sialkot for Respondens. Malik Shahbaz Ahmad for
Respondent No.1. Barrister Osama Ahmad for Re
F.A.O. No. 73598 of 2021, decided on 15th February, 2022.Dates of hearing: 10th and 15th February, 2022.
Before Shujaat Ali Khan, J
Hafeez ur Rehman Ch. assisted by Noor Dad Chaudhry for Appellants. Rana Shamshad Khan, Additional Advocate General with Ms. Rashida Batool, Registrar of Firm, Sialkot for Respondens. Malik Shahbaz Ahmad for
Respondent No.1. Barrister Osama Ahmad for Re
RABEAH HUSSAIN and 3 others---Appellants
VS
NUSRAT AFTAB and 6 others---Respondents
Law: Partnership Act, 1932
Section: 42
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 1,2
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 39,42,54
Partnership Act (IX of 1932)--- ----S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss. 39, 42 & 54---Suit for declaration, rendition of account, permanent injunction and recovery---Dissolution of partnership---Death of a partner---Interim injunction, refusal of---Scope---Plaintiff claimed that cl. 12 of the Partnership Deed was against the injunction of Islam as a partnership could not continue in the event of death of a partner---Validity---Plaintiffs on the ground that cl. 12 of the Partnership Deed was against injunctions of Islam were not entitled for interim relief on the said ground alone as it was to be decided by Trial Court after thrashing evidence of the parties, as to whether cl. 12 was valid or not, thus, no opinion could be rendered by the Court in that regard---Allegedly, in case the appeal was not accepted the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable loss, however monetary loss did not constitute irreparable loss rather in case a party was found entitled to any fiscal benefit, at the time of final adjudication of the matter, the Court would be empowered to order in that regard but no relief could be granted under O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2, C.P.C.---Three ingredients i.e. prima-facie case, balance of inconvenience in favour of the plaintiff and irreparable loss must exist for grant of temporary injunction, which were missing in the case of the plaintiffs---Trial Court had committed no illegality while declining application of grant of temporary injunction--- Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Islamic Republic of Pakistan through Secretary, Establishment Division, Islamabad and others v. Muhammad Zaman Khan and others 1997 SCMR 1508; Khan Muhammad Niazi v. Messrs Habib Bank Ltd. Assistant Vice-President and Incharge Vigillance Team, President s Secretariat, Habib Bank Annex, Head Office, Karachi and 3 others 1997 MLD 1304; Messrs United Bank Ltd. v. Messrs Iftikhar and Company and 6 others PLD 1990 Lah. 111; Iftikhar Siddiqui v. Clifton Cantonment Board and others PLD 1998 Kar. 373; Atif Mehmood Kiyani and another v. Messrs Sukh Chayn Private Limited, Royal Plaza, Blue Area, Islamabad and…
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