Case Details

Citation(s)
1994 SLG 1588 1994 SLD 1588 = 1994 PLD 228

Civil Revision No. 96 of 1993, decided on 6th April, 1994.
Saleem Dil Khan, J

D1STRICT COUNCIL HARIPUR through Admin1strator, Deputy Commissioner, Haripur---Defendant/Petitioner

VERSUS

ZAHEER ULLAH KHAN---Plaintiff/Respondent

Law:

Section:

This revision petition under section 115, C.P.C. has called in question the legal validity of the judgment and decree dated 27-4-1993 passed by Additional D1strict Judge, Haripur as Court of appeal/revision; in the back drop of the order dated 6 - 1-1993 passed by Senior Civil Judge Haripur. The dispute relates to the contract of collection of export tax, awarded to Zahirullah Khan respondent by D1strict Council, Haripur in an open auction. Facts giving rise to the dispute are that Government of N.-W.F.P. granted exemption from collection of export tax over certain items including ground nut, wheat and flour. Zahirullah Khan respondent (contractor) demanded a rebate, from the D1strict Council (petitioner) at the rate ranging between Rs.45,000 and Rs.50,000 per day to make up the loss incurred by him as a result of the aforesaid exemption granted by the Provincial Government as duly notified by Secretary, Local Council Board, the parent authority of the D1strict Council, Haripur. The said demand was not acceded to by the D1strict Council which resulted in filing of a civil suit by Zahirullah plaintiff/respondent.   The D1strict Council, Haripur, represented by its legal adviser, submitted application before the learned trial Court to the effect that the suit was not competent because section 34 of the Arbitration Act was firmly standing in its way. But this plea did not find any favour with the learned trial Court and the same was dismissed through Order Sheet No. 5 dated 6-1-1993. To aggravate the grievance of the petitioner, another order by way of affording interim relief within the meaning of Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 , C.P.C. was also passed whereby it was directed that plaintiff/respondent Zahirulah shall deposit all the dues and outstanding arrears of contract but, shall be entitled to withhold 25 % of the amount collected as tax for making good a recurring loss incurred by him as a result of the dispute under the present lis. Not content therewith, the present petitioner filed an appeal in the Court of D1strict Judge, Haripur which was heard and decided by Additional D1strict Judge, Haripur and the decision was announced on 27,4-1993. The petitioner…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register