| Case ID |
2e248cab-fb0c-4bb8-bd60-e1b340f6f0b8 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
F.A.O. 137 of 2020 |
| Decision Date |
May 04, 2021 |
| Hearing Date |
Mar 03, 2021 |
| Decision |
The Islamabad High Court dismissed the appeal filed by Performance Automotive Private Limited against the order of the Additional District Judge, which had granted interim relief to Muhammad Safwan Javaid. The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to a stay of the specific performance sought by the respondent, as the respondent had made a prima facie case for the specific performance of a customized vehicle order. The court emphasized that seeking compensation in alternative to specific performance does not negate the right to seek an injunction. The court found that the appellant had breached the contract by failing to deliver the vehicle in accordance with the agreed terms and had acted in bad faith by selling the vehicle to another customer after accepting a deposit from the respondent. Therefore, the High Court upheld the decision of the trial court, reinforcing the principles of specific performance and the rights of parties in contractual agreements. |
| Summary |
In the case of F.A.O. 137 of 2020 decided by the Islamabad High Court, the court addressed issues pertaining to specific performance of contracts under the Specific Relief Act, 1877. The case involved Performance Automotive Private Limited, which failed to deliver a customized Porsche vehicle to the respondent, Muhammad Safwan Javaid. The court found that the appellant's actions constituted a breach of contract as they sold the vehicle to a third party after accepting a deposit from the respondent. The court emphasized that interim injunctions can be granted even when alternative remedies of compensation are sought. The judgment underscores key concepts in contract law, including the enforceability of specific performance and the implications of a party's conduct in commercial transactions. This ruling is significant for understanding the balance between specific performance and damages in contractual disputes. |
| Court |
Islamabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Performance Automotive Private Limited,
Porsche AG
|
| Judges |
Babar Sattar
|
| Lawyers |
Zafar Kundi,
Ms. Shazia Malik
|
| Petitioners |
M/S. Performance Automotive Private Limited through Chief Executive Officer and 3 others
|
| Respondents |
Muhammad Safwan Javaid and 6 others
|
| Citations |
2022 SLD 250,
2022 CLC 37
|
| Other Citations |
Puri Terminal Limited v. Government of Pakistan 2004 SCMR 1092,
Bolan Beverages (Pvt.) Limited v. Pepsico Inc. and 4 others 2004 CLD 1530,
Ghulam Nabi and others v. Seth Muhammad Yaqub and others PLD 1983 SC 344,
Sardar Vial v. Hirde Nath (AIR 1925 Lah. 459(2)),
Abdul Karim v. Muhammad Shafi 1973 SCMR 225,
Liaqat Ali Khan v. Falak Sher PLD 2014 SC 506,
Sakina Bai v. Kurnool Muhammad Bashir PLD 1967 Sindh 158,
Hakim Ghulam Rasool v. Sh. Imdad Hussain PLD 1968 Lah. 501,
Mian Kaman Ilahi v. Digiri Sugar Mills Limited 2014 CLD 1583,
Arif Shah v. Abdul Hakim PLD 1986 Kar. 189,
Abdul Hakim and 2 others v. Saadullah Khan and 2 others PLD 1970 SC 63,
M.K Abbasi v. United Bank Ltd. 1983 CLC 482
|
| Laws Involved |
Specific Relief Act, 1877,
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
|
| Sections |
12,
56(i),
O.II, R.2,
O.XXXIX, Rr.1-2
|