| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1962 SLG = 1962 SLD 2700 = 1962 PLD 113 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 19, 20 and 21 of 1961, decided on 22nd February 1962.
Presented By: A. R. Cornelius, C. J., S. A. Rahman, Fazle-Akbar, B. Z. Kaikaus and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ
Civil Appeal No. 19 of 1961. M. F. Rahman Senior Advocate Supreme Court (S. M. Husain and M. J. Jafar Advocates Supreme Court with him) instructed by S. A. Hasib Attorney for Appellant, A. K. Brohi Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Mozammel Huq Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by A. T. Sadi Attorney for
Respondent. Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1961. M. F. Rahman Senior Advocate Supreme Court (S. M. Husain and M. J. Jaffar Advocates Supreme Court with him) instructed by Siddlq & Company Attorneys for Appellant. A. K. Brohl Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Mozammel Huq Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by A. T. Sadi Attorney for
Respondent. Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1961. M. F. Rahman Senior Advocate Supreme Court (S. M. Husain and M. J. Jaffar Advocates Supreme Court with him) instructed by Siddiq & Company Attorneys for Appellant. A. K. Brohi Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Mozammel Huq Advocate Supreme Court with him) Instructed by A. T. Sadi Attorney for
Respondent. Date of hearing : 22nd February 1962.
Civil Appeals Nos. 19, 20 and 21 of 1961, decided on 22nd February 1962.
Presented By: A. R. Cornelius, C. J., S. A. Rahman, Fazle-Akbar, B. Z. Kaikaus and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ
Civil Appeal No. 19 of 1961. M. F. Rahman Senior Advocate Supreme Court (S. M. Husain and M. J. Jafar Advocates Supreme Court with him) instructed by S. A. Hasib Attorney for Appellant, A. K. Brohi Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Mozammel Huq Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by A. T. Sadi Attorney for
Respondent. Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1961. M. F. Rahman Senior Advocate Supreme Court (S. M. Husain and M. J. Jaffar Advocates Supreme Court with him) instructed by Siddlq & Company Attorneys for Appellant. A. K. Brohl Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Mozammel Huq Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by A. T. Sadi Attorney for
Respondent. Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1961. M. F. Rahman Senior Advocate Supreme Court (S. M. Husain and M. J. Jaffar Advocates Supreme Court with him) instructed by Siddiq & Company Attorneys for Appellant. A. K. Brohi Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Mozammel Huq Advocate Supreme Court with him) Instructed by A. T. Sadi Attorney for
Respondent. Date of hearing : 22nd February 1962.
Civil Appeal No. 19 of 1961 THE BURMAH OIL COMPANY (PAKISTAN TRADING) LTD., CHITTAGONG-Appellant
VERSUS
THE TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF CHITTAGONG- Respondent Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1961 THE STANDARD VACUUM OIL COMPANY KARACHI-Appellant Versus THE TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF CHITTAGONG Respondent AND Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1961 THE BURMAH SHELL OIL STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTING COMPANY OF PAKISTAN LTD. KARACHI-Appellant Versus THE TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF CHITTAGONG ---Respondent
Law:
Section:
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of East Pakistan, Dacca, dated the 19th December, 1960, in Writ Petitions Nos. 61, 62 and 63 of 1960). Chittagong Port Act (V of 1914)----Ss. 95, 112-Exemptions- Granted (by Notification No. 180-Marine dated 26-9-1903) under Chittagong Port Commissioners Act, 1887, S. 44 - Continue to be effective, after repeal of latter Act, by virtue of S. 112 as well as S. 8, Bengal General Clauses Act (1 of 1899). Writ-----Lathes-"Threat" to right, not assuming "lively" aspect for considerable time - Date of "threat" not taken for starting point of time for purpose of "lathes"-Constitution of Pakistan (1956) Art. 170. Writ------Other remedy (Suit) - Infringement of fiscal right based on statutory instrument-Writ of mandamus "in every way appropriate remedy" - Constitution of Pakistan (1956), Art. 170. JUDGMENT CORNELIUS, C. J.----This judgment will dispose of three Civil Appeals No. 19 of 1961, by the Burmah Oil Company (Pakistan Trading) Ltd. No. 20 of 1961, by the Standard Vacuum Oil Company and No. 21 of 1961, by the Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Company of Pakistan Ltd. In each case the Trustees of the Port of Chittagong are the respondents and the judgment appealed against in each of the appeals is that by which writ petitions filed by the three appellant-Companies before the High Court of East Pakistan were dismissed. The petitions raised in essence a single question which may be stated as follows. Each of the Companies imports oil in tankers at the Port of Chittagong and after a period of storage of the said oil in tanks maintained at the jetties etc. belonging to the respective Companies, the oil is distributed by means of other vessels to other places in East Pakistan. It is possible that in part the distribution is not by sea, but the present case is confined to a levy upon transport by sea going vessels of oil which has been stored for a greater or less period in the storage tanks aforesaid. One question which has been raised in the cases is as to the length of this period of storage. There is no proof…