Case Details

Citation(s)
1994 SLG 1054 1994 SLD 1054 = 1994 CLC 1516
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petitions Nos. D-801 and 802 of 1985,decision dated: 13-12-1993
SYED HAIDER ALI PIMADA AND NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, JJ

Messrs MUSHTAQ TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED-vsKarachi High Court METROPOLITAN CORPORATION through Mayorand 3 others

Law: West Pakistan Municipal Committee Octroi Rules, 1964

Section: 95

(a) Words and Phrases-------"Aggregate"---Meaning of----Aggregate" means a collection of things in order to form a whole.(b) Administration of justice------- Denial of justice---Order which did not deal with merits of case and did not indicate that it was passed after applying mind to relevant facts and merits of case, could not be termed as a valid order at all---Order, whether it was passed by a judicial tribunal or quasi-judicial tribunal or even by an executive authority, must indicate that it was passed after considering all relevant facts and respective claims of parties---An arbitrary exercise of jurisdiction, in flagrant disregard of law and principles of natural justice, word tantamount to denial of justice.(c) West Pakistan Municipal Committee Octroi Rules, 1964-------R. 95---Levy of octroi---Imported goods which were to be used by importer in his Mill located outside local area of corporation, temporarily retained in bonded warehouse under licence from corporation---Initial validity period of thirty days allowed under R. 95 for temporary retention of goods was extendable for another period of thirty days---Importer having been unable to carry away goods due to unavoidable circumstances and transport difficulties, applied for extension of one month as was permissible under R. 95 before expiry of initial period of thirty days, but corporation without giving any opportunity of hearing, to importer rejected request of importer for extension of period and ordered importer to remove goods against payment of octroi--�Goods in question were not to be used locally, but were to be shifted to and utilized in mill located out side local jurisdiction of corporation and declaration to that effect had already been made by importer while retaining goods in warehouse---Corporation in circumstances, had no power to levy octroi on such goods until it was proved through reliable evidence that importer had changed his mind in respect of use of goods in local area of Corporation--�Corporation could not produce any proof that imported goods in transit were intended by importers for consumption, use or sale within octroi limit of Corporation---Orders relating to payment…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register