Case Details

Citation(s)
1993 SLG 854 1993 SLD 854 1993 CLC 489
Sindh High Court

WAJIHUDDIN AHMED, J
Sajid Zahid for Plaintiff. Mansoorul Arfin for Defendants No. 1, 5, 7 to 12, 14 and 15. I.A. Hashmi for Defendants Nos.2 and 4. Raja H. Nawaz for Defendants Nos3 and 6. Khalid Anwar for Defendant No. 13. Muhammad Ali Saeed for the alleged Contemnors

EMIRATES BANK INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, KARACHI--Plaintiff

VS

ADAMJEE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, KARACHI and 14 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Contempt of Court--- ---- Accidental/intentional disregard of Court's order---In contempt proceedings for an order of Court to take effect and bind those concerned, formal service thereof would not be necessary to prove; due knowledge of order would suffice---As to accidental disregard of order, claimed to be wanting in intention; once knowledge was shown, the very fact that contravening act of commission or omission, was undertaken intentionally and with volition, would render the act intentional. A.N.M. Mahmood v. M.O. Ghani PLD 1967 Dacca 67; M.O. Ghani v. A.N.M. Mahmood PLD 1966 SC 802 and Ahmad Shah v. State PLD 1967 SC 42 rel. Hayat Ahmed Khan v. Bashir Sadiq PLD 1952 Lah. 48 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----OXXXIX, R.2(3), Ss.94 & 151---Disobedience/breach of Court's order--­Object, scope and import of provisions of OXXXIX, Rr.l & 2, Ss.94 & 151 in respect of disobedience/breach of Court's order---Provisions of Obi, Rr.l & 2 are extension of S.94, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, under which they have been prescribed---Section 94, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, subject to Rules and Orders postulates that in order to prevent justice from being defeated, Court could grant temporary injunction and in case of disobedience, commit person guilty thereof, to civil prison and order that his property be attached and sold---Provisions of S.151, having envisaged exercise of inherent powers if necessary for the ends of justice, implication was that powers under the section could ipso facto be invoked in cases of disobedience or breach of an interim injunction or its terms, and the rule extends also to non-parties--­Court can adopt any procedure while dealing with a case of disobedience/breach of Court's order unless found prohibited---Both S.94(c) and OXXXIX, R.2(3), C.P.C. speak of "person" and not a party; remedy provided by such provisions was thus, not restricted to parties. A.N.M. Mahmood v. M.O. Ghani PLD 1967 Dacca 67; M.O. Ghani v. A.N.M. Mahmood PLD 1966 SC 802; Ahmad Shah v. State PLD 1967 SC 42; Ram Prasad Singh v. Benares Bank Ltd. AIR 1919 All. 20; Adaikhale Thevan v. Imperial Bank AIR 1926 Mad. 574; Muhammad Naziruddin v.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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