| Case ID |
369d244c-4d64-471c-a4d0-7a8b2a5a1a71 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Execution No. 36 of 2001 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 17, 2015 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The application for restitution under section 144 of the Civil Procedure Code was dismissed. The court found that the provision of section 410 of the Companies Ordinance does not apply automatically in winding up proceedings unless the court directs its applicability. The court emphasized that the compromise decree does not equate to a judicial determination that the previous decree was erroneous, thus not triggering restitution. The court stated that the applicants sought enforcement of the compromise decree rather than true restitution, which cannot be granted under these circumstances. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the execution proceedings initiated by Habib Bank Limited against National Fibers Limited under the Companies Ordinance and Civil Procedure Code. The applicants, who are majority shareholders of National Fibers, sought restitution of the company's property sold in an auction. The Sindh High Court, presided by Justice Munib Akhtar, ruled that the provisions of the Companies Ordinance, particularly section 410, do not automatically apply unless directed by the court. The court also clarified that the applicants' request for restitution was essentially an enforcement of a compromise decree rather than a reversion to the original state. This ruling highlights the complexities of corporate law and the significance of judicial determinations in restitution claims. Keywords for SEO optimization include 'restitution of property', 'Companies Ordinance', 'Civil Procedure Code', 'execution proceedings', and 'high court decisions'. These terms are trending and relevant for legal practitioners and scholars. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
National Bank of Pakistan,
Habib Bank Limited,
Allied Bank,
Faysal Bank
|
| Judges |
MUNIB AKHTAR, J
|
| Lawyers |
Mushtaq A. Memon,
Ishtiaq A. Memon,
Qazi Shuneel Ahmad,
Muhammad Abu Bakar Khalil,
Ms. Nancy Dean,
A. I. Chundrigar,
Nabeel Kolachi,
Behzad Haider,
Abid Naseem,
Ms. Afshan Jamal,
Faisal Siddiqui
|
| Petitioners |
Not available
|
| Respondents |
Messrs NATIONAL FIBERS LIMITED
|
| Citations |
2015 SLD 2864 = 2015 CLD 1351
|
| Other Citations |
Nazeer Ahmed Khan v. Admore Gas (Pvt.) Ltd. and another 2015 CLD 203,
Registrar of Companies v. Taj Company Ltd. 1993 CLC 1413,
Taj Company (Muhammad Yousaf applicant): In the mater of 1994 CLC 403,
In re: Taj Company Ltd. 1994 CLC 2197,
National Bank of Pakistan v. Banking Tribunal No.1 and others PLD 1994 Kar. 358,
Shaheen Foundation v. Capital F.M. (Pvt.) Ltd. 2002 CLD 188,
Abdul Bari v. Muhammad Rasheed Khan 1995 SCMR 851,
Zubaida Bai v. IInd Rent Controller Karachi and another PLD 1981 Kar. 82,
Meraj Din v. Ghulam Muhammad PLD 1965 Lah. 374,
Lakhsmi Narayan and others v. Surath Lal Chakraborti and others PLD 1964 Dacca 177,
Badaruddin v. Maniruddin PLD 1961 Dacca 686,
Rodger v. Comptoir D'Escompte de Paris (1871) L.R. 3 P.C. 465,
Sevatha Goundan v. Pappammal and others AIR 1935 Mad. 476,
Kandula Sudarsana Rao v. Uppulury Gopala Rao (1933) MWN 641,
Anjum Rasheed and others v. Shehzad and others 2007 CLD 1210,
Pakistan Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation Ltd. v. Khairpur Sugar Mills Ltd. and another 2012 CLD 1192
|
| Laws Involved |
Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984),
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
Ss. 290 & 410,
S. 144
|