| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4176 2025 SLD 4176 = 2025 CLC 841 |
Sindh High Court
IInd Appeals Nos. 139 and 140 of 2022, decided on 29th November, 2024.
Before Shamsuddin Abbasi, J
Mansoor Ahmed Alvi along with Alam Zaib, Law Officer and Abdul Jabbar, Engineer, SBP for Appellant. Barrister Mian Haad A. M. Paggawala for
Respondent.
IInd Appeals Nos. 139 and 140 of 2022, decided on 29th November, 2024.
Before Shamsuddin Abbasi, J
Mansoor Ahmed Alvi along with Alam Zaib, Law Officer and Abdul Jabbar, Engineer, SBP for Appellant. Barrister Mian Haad A. M. Paggawala for
Respondent.
STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN ---Appellant
VERSUS
AZEEM ASSOCIATES through Partner ---Respondent
Law: Contract Act (IX of 1872)
Section: 39,73,74
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 96,100,101,XLI
Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)
Section: 39
Damages-------Rescission of contract for construction work and encashment of guarantee--Contractor/respondent instituted a suit for damages with injunction, which was decreed declining interest---Parties preferred respective appeals; however, the respondent's appeal was accepted, extending interest relief, and the appellant/bank's appeal was dismissed---Validity---Respondent placed sufficient evidence to substantiate that due to appellant's failure to perform its part of the contract within the stipulated time, the respondent suffered losses due to changed circumstances and a tremendous rise in relevant material prices, hence, it was entitled to damages--Appellant failed to lead evidence to negate the respondent's claim---Respondent's evidence remained un-shattered during cross-examination---Trial Court, based on evidence and documents, decreed the respondent's suit, which was maintained by the Appellate Court, which also granted interest declined by the Trial Court--Appellate Court's judgment and decree were well-reasoned and lawful, therefore, there was no reason to interfere in the Appellate Court's findings, which were the result of proper appreciation of evidence and material, as well as conscious application of mind to the case's facts and circumstances, hence, no interference was required by the High Court---Regular second appeals were dismissed, in circumstances.PLD 2017 Islamabad 115; 2013 SCMR 507; 2015 SCMR 01; 2010 SCMR 829; 2019 CLC 01; 2019 SCMR 524; 2013 SCMR 1570; PLD 2002 SC 607; 2021 SCMR 1805 and 2020 SCMR 214 distingueshed.2000 SCMR 254; 1996 SCMR 1729 and 2023 SCMR 1652 ref.2006 CLD 107; Naseer Ahmed Siddique through legal heirs v. Aftab Alam and another PLD 2011 SC 323; Keramat Ali and another v. Muhammad Yunus Haji and others PLD 1963 SC 191; Bashir Ahmed v. Mst. Taja Begum and others PLD 2010 SC 906 and Muhammad Iqbal and another v. Mukhtar Ahmad through L.Rs 2008 SCMR 855 rel.Dates of hearing: 29th October and 13th November, 2024.JUDGMENTSHAMSUDDIN ABBASI, J.---Vide judgment dated 26.04.2007, penned down by the learned Senior Civil Judge-VI, Karachi (South), Suit No. 381 of 2004 (Old Suit No. 52 of 1983), filed by the respondent was…