Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 2594 2003 SLD 2594 2003 CLC 969
Sindh High Court
Suit No.918 and Civil Miscellaneous Applications Nos.6369, 6370, 6371 and 6173 of 2002, decision dated: 6-11-2002.
ZIA PERWEZ, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

ASIAN FOOD INDUS-TRIES and others--Plaintiffs

VS

Messrs ISMAIL INDUSTRIES and others----Defendants

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----------O. 11, R. 2 & O. XXXIX, Rr. 1, 2---Splitting of claims--­Omission of claim---Plaintiff in earlier suit omitted the claim and interim relief was refused---Plaintiff again prayed for interim relief in subsequent suit, which was based on same cause of action---Such relief could not be made subject-matter of subsequent suit---Splitting of claims arising out of same cause of action was not permissible as a party could not be vexed twice for same cause of action----Suit being hit by provisions of 0.11, R.2, C.P.C., was dismissed. M.K. Abbasi v. United Bank Ltd. 1983 CLC 482; Muhammad Khalil Khan and others v. Mahboob Ali Mian and others PLD 1948 PC 131 and Abdul Hakim v. Saadullah Khan PLD 1970 SC 63 rel. Khurram Gul Ghory for Plaintiffs. Salim Ghulam Hussain for Defendant. Date of hearing: 9th October, 2002. ORDER The plaintiff, Messrs Asian Food Industries Limited, I this suit against the defendant, Messrs Ismail Industries for permanent injunction, damages, and rendition of accounts. The defendants filed C.M.A. No.6369 of 2002 under Order 2, rule 2, C.P.C. read with section 151 thereof, praying for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the plaintiffs have intentionally omitted to sue for all the reliefes arising out of the same cause of action and thus cannot be permitted to claim the same or other relief in this suit. The defendants also filed C.M.A. No.6370 of 2002 under Order VII, rule 11, C.P.C. read with section 151, C.P.C., for rejection of the plaint in the suit on the ground that no fresh cause of action accrued to the plaintiffs and that the law bars the present suit. The defendants filed yet another application under section 10, C.P.C., being C.M.A. No.6371 of 2002, for stay of proceedings in this suit as issues in this suit are directly and substantially same as in previous Suit No:5 of 2002 between the same parties. Brief facts of the case are, that plaintiffs claim to be manufacturers, sellers and suppliers of candies, toffees, bubble gums, and like products since 1968 for which they are using different trade marks including "Mayfair". They spent a huge amount on the promotion of their products. In the…
🔒
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