| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 3749 2025 SLD 3749 = 2025 CLD 474 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.23509 of 2020, decided on 6th May, 2022.
Before Asim Hafeez, J
Uzair Karamat Bhandari, M. Suhail Tipu, Ali Uzair Bhandari and Mian Muhammad Kashif for Petitioners. Zaki Rehman, Zaheer A. Cheema and Ali Hur Jamal for
Respondent No.1. Barrister Aun Ali Raza, Ahmad Nisar Khan, Syed Ali Asim Raza Shamsi and M. Nouman Shams Qazi for
Respondents Nos.2 (2.1, 2.2). Ch. Muhammad Shabbir for
Respondent No.3.
Civil Revision No.23509 of 2020, decided on 6th May, 2022.
Before Asim Hafeez, J
Uzair Karamat Bhandari, M. Suhail Tipu, Ali Uzair Bhandari and Mian Muhammad Kashif for Petitioners. Zaki Rehman, Zaheer A. Cheema and Ali Hur Jamal for
Respondent No.1. Barrister Aun Ali Raza, Ahmad Nisar Khan, Syed Ali Asim Raza Shamsi and M. Nouman Shams Qazi for
Respondents Nos.2 (2.1, 2.2). Ch. Muhammad Shabbir for
Respondent No.3.
A.M. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (PRIVATE) LIMITED---Petitioner
VERSUS
TAISEI CORPORATION and others---Respondents
Law: Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Ordinance, 2011
Section: XVII,4
Law: Arbitration Act, 1940
Section: X,14,34,46,47
(a) Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act (XVII of 2011)-------S. 4---Arbitration Act (X of 1940), S.14---Arbitration---Stay of proceedings--Subcontract---Scope---Petitioner / plaintiff was a subcontractor, whereas main contract was between respondent / foreign company and respondent / National Highway Authority (NHA)---Petitioner / plaintiff filed civil suit under S. 14 of Arbitration Act, 1940 against respondent / foreign company---Trial Court on application filed by respondent / foreign company stayed proceedings of suit under S. 4 of Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act, 2011, as Foreign Arbitral Award had already been issued in its favour--Validity---Mere exchange of few letters or act of registering some complaints, in absence of privity of contract between petitioner / plaintiff and respondent / NHA, did not give any cause of action to petitioner / plaintiff to sue respondent / NHA--Subcontract was independent and any representation made therein, or scope of obligations undertaken in the context thereof did not bind respondent / NHA- the employer, which could not be held liable for any vicarious liability in the guise of subcontract---Arbitration agreement, under reference, was not null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed---High Court declined to interfere in the order passed by Trial Court and directed that legal proceedings would remain stayed till the circumstances so warranted and could be resurrected if conditions so arise---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.Taisei Corporation v. A.M. Construction Company (Pvt.) Ltd. PLD 2012 Lah.455; Taisei Corporation v. A.M. Construction Company (Pvt.) Ltd. 2018 MLD 2058; Muhammad Aslam and another v. Munshi Muhammad Behram and another 1991 SCMR 1971; Mubarik Cotton Factory v. Messrs General Agencies, Multan PLD 1980 Baghdadul Jadid 1; Orient Power Company (Pvt.) Limited v. SuiNorthern Gas Pipelines Limited PLD 2019 Lah. 607; Orient Power Company (Private) Limited through Authorized Officer v. Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited through Managing Director 2021 CLD 1069; Bharti Televentures Ltd. v.…