Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.III, R.1, O.XXIX, R.1, XXXIX, Rr: 1, 2 & O.XLIII, R.1(r)

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 95

Law: Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001

Section: 46

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--O.III, R.1, O.XXIX, R.1, XXXIX, Rr: 1, 2 & O.XLIII, R.1(r)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.95---Suit by corporation---Dismissal of application for interim injunction---Objection as to non-signing of plaint by authorized person raised by defendant before Appellate Court---Validity---Defendant had not raised such objection in counter-affidavit filed before Trial Court, consequently plaintiff had no opportunity to meet such objection---Power of Attorney filed by plaintiff before appellate Court was duly notarized by Consulate General of Pakistan before filing of suit and Notorial Certificate supported competency of its executants---,Question as to whether person, who signed plaint was competent or not, was a question of fact and not purely a question of law, which could not be raised in appeal or during course of arguments before Appellate Court---Failure of plaintiff to establish during trial valid authorization of Attorney, would call for dismissal of suit and not before---Such objection being a question of fact could be decided appropriately at the stage of trial---High Court dismissed appeal in circumstances.Muhammad Siddique Umer v. Australasia Bank Limited PLD 1966 SC 684; Aki Habara Electric Corporation (PTE.) Limited v. Hyder Magnetic Industries (Private) Limited PLD 2003 Kar. 420 and N.V. Nutricia v. Messrs Nutricia Foods International (Private) Limited 2000 CLC 866 ref.ANZ Grindlays Bank Limited v. Saadi Cement Company Limited and others PLD 2001 Kar. 143 and United Bank Limited v. Shahyar Textile Mills Limited 1996 CLC 106 rel.(b) Civil Procedure (V of 1908)-----O.III, R.1 & O.XXIX, R.1---Person signing plaint, competency of---Question as to whether person, who signed plaint was competent or not, is a question of fact and not purely a question of law.ANZ Grindlays Bank Limited v. Saadi Cement Company Limited and others PLD 2001 Kar. 143 and United Bank Limited v. Shahyar Textile Mills Limited 1996 CLC 106 rel.(c) Trade Marks Ordinance (XIX of 2001)-----S.46---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX Rr. 1 & 2---Suit for declaration and injunction for infrignment of trade and service. mark---Interim…