| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1980 SLG 172 1980 SLD 172 1980 SCMR 89 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 245 of 1979, decision dated: 31st December, 1979. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 27 3 1979, in F. A. O. No. 264/79).
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN AND NASIM HASAN SHAH, JJ
Ch. Aziz Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Ghulam Mujtaba, Advocate on-Record. Qamar ud din, Advocate, Supreme Court and Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record Nos. 2 and 3.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 245 of 1979, decision dated: 31st December, 1979. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 27 3 1979, in F. A. O. No. 264/79).
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN AND NASIM HASAN SHAH, JJ
Ch. Aziz Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Ghulam Mujtaba, Advocate on-Record. Qamar ud din, Advocate, Supreme Court and Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record Nos. 2 and 3.
BAKHTAWAR ETC.
VS
AMIN ETC.
Law:
Section:
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) ---- O. XLI, r. 5 Appeal to Supreme Court Stay order Stay order granted by Supreme Court on undertaking given by petitioner Deliberate violation of such undertaking Held, can be taken serious notice of. [Supreme Court Stay order Appeal (civil). Muhammad Salim Khan Yusafzai v. K. Mohiuddin 1968 SCMR 557 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) ----- O: XXXIX, r. 2 (3) read with S. 151 Injunction Party against whom injunction order passed doing something for its own advantage and to disadvantage of other party Court can, under its inherent jurisdiction bring back such party to original position Plea that since tad interim order was later discharged, violation of such order was no longer cognisable Held, without substance. [Jurisdiction¬-Injunction]. When by contravening an injunction order the party against whom the order is passed has done something for its own advantage to disadvantage of the other party, it is open to the Court under its inherent jurisdiction to bring back the party to a position where it originally stood, as if the order had not been contravened. The exercise of this inherent power is based on the principle that no party can be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong in spite of the order to the contrary passed by the Court. Ayyammal and another v. Thangavelu Padayachi A I R 1950 Mad. 317; Maharaj Bahadur Singh v. A. H. Forbes A I R 1922 Pat. 382; The State of Bihar v. Usha Devi and another A I R 1956 Pat. 455; Magna and another v. Rustam and another A I R 1963 Raj. 3 and B. F. Varghese v. Joseph Thomas A I R 1957 Trav Co. 286 ref. It was argued that since ultimately the ad interim order of status quo was later discharged by the Court, violation of such order was not cognisable: Held, such plea has no substance. Bagga and others v. Saleh and others A I R 1915 P C 106 and Ottapur ak¬kal Thazath Suppi and others v. Alabi Mashur Koyanna Koya Kunhi Koya A I R 1917 Mad. 448 ref. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) ---- S. 58 and O. XXXI, r. 2 (2) read with S. 36 & O. XXI, r. 32 (1) Securing compliance and execution of an order of injunction by directing arrest and detention of debtor Held, a matter…
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