Case ID |
0c4abc80-6f85-498b-9403-e3b538bb629e |
Body |
View case body. Login to View |
Case Number |
First Appeal No. 16 of 1988 |
Decision Date |
Oct 15, 1992 |
Hearing Date |
Oct 15, 1992 |
Decision |
The appeal is dismissed as the appellants failed to furnish the required security for the amount in dispute despite being granted extensions. The court emphasized that under the provisions of Order XXXVII, Rule 3(2), the failure to furnish security results in the suit being decreed in favor of the plaintiff based on the contents of the plaint. The appellants were debarred from contesting the suit, and the court ruled that any claims regarding amounts already paid could not be considered due to lack of evidence. The judgment allows the appellants to pursue a separate suit against the Woollen Industries without prejudice to this decision. |
Summary |
The case revolves around a summary procedure for the recovery of an amount under the Civil Procedure Code. The appellants, who were guarantors, failed to provide the necessary security as ordered by the court, leading to their inability to contest the suit. The court analyzed the guarantees and promissory notes involved, ultimately ruling in favor of the respondents. This case highlights the importance of complying with court orders and the implications of failing to furnish security in legal proceedings. Keywords: summary procedure, recovery of amount, Civil Procedure Code, court orders, legal proceedings. |
Court |
Sindh High Court
|
Entities Involved |
Shaafi Woollen Industries Limited
|
Judges |
ABDUL RAHIM KAZI, J
|
Lawyers |
Nasiruddin,
Muhammad Sharif
|
Petitioners |
Karachi High Court and 2 others
|
Respondents |
M/S. ALPHA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. and another
|
Citations |
1994 SLD 1058,
1994 CLC 1526
|
Other Citations |
Iftikhar Ahmed v. Muhammad Younus Khan 1982 CLC 2114,
Allied Bank of Pakistan v. V.C. Khilnani and 2 others PLD 1984 Karachi 127
|
Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
Sections |
OXXXVII, Rr. 2 & 3
|