| Case ID |
41ca22de-c98e-4903-bd5a-ae5177f2bdeb |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Suit No.8 and C.M.As. Nos. 62 and 1048 of 2011 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 03, 2011 |
| Hearing Date |
May 11, 2011 |
| Decision |
The High Court declined to grant interim injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, stating that the plaintiffs had no prima facie case and the balance of convenience was not in their favor. The court emphasized that the suspension of the defendants was not valid as it did not follow the procedures outlined in the partnership deed, particularly regarding the required majority for such a decision. The court found that the defendants had been partners for over 20 years and had a significant stake in the firm, which should not be disregarded without proper procedure. The dismissal of the plaintiffs' application indicated that the court recognized the potential harm to the defendants' rights and interests. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around a partnership dispute involving M. Yousuf Adil Saleem & Co. Chartered Accountants and its partners. The plaintiffs sought an interim injunction against the defendants, claiming that they were suspended from the firm without proper procedure as outlined in the Partnership Act, 1932 and the firm's partnership deed. The court examined the validity of the suspension and the process leading up to it, ultimately finding that the plaintiffs had not established a prima facie case for the injunction. The decision underscored the importance of adhering to the established protocols in partnership agreements, particularly regarding the expulsion and suspension of partners. The ruling highlighted that any changes in partnership status require a majority vote and that unilateral actions by the board without proper authority could not stand. The case emphasizes the necessity for transparency and due process in partnership operations, ensuring that all partners are treated fairly and equitably. The summary illustrates the complexities of partnership law and the critical nature of following legal protocols, making it relevant for legal practitioners in the field of corporate law, especially those dealing with partnership disputes. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
M. YOUSUF ADIL SALEEM & CO.,
Deloitte
|
| Judges |
SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI
|
| Lawyers |
Rasheed A. Rizvi,
Ravi Pinjani,
Laila Bhgatia,
Munir A. Malik,
Chaudhry Atif
|
| Petitioners |
M. YOUSUF ADIL SALEEM & CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS AND 5 OTHERS
|
| Respondents |
MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND ANOTHER
|
| Citations |
2012 SLD 970,
2012 CLD 364
|
| Other Citations |
Inam Naqshband v. Haji Shaikh Ijaz Ahmad PLD 1995 SC 314,
Bashir Ahmed and 3 others v. Muhammad Aslam and 6 others 2003 SCMR 1864,
Iqbal Ahmad Sabri v. Fayyaz Ahmad and another 2007 CLC 1089,
Nem Das and others v. Kunj Behari Lal and another AIR 1928 Oudh 424,
Mian Muhammad Latif v. Province of West Pakistan PLD 1970 SC 180,
S. Azhar-ul-Hassan Naqvi v. Mst. Hamida Bibi and 2 others 1979 CLC 754,
Muhammad Ramzan v. Trustees of Port of Karachi 1990 CLC 1086,
House Building Finance Corporation v. Shahinshah Humayun Cooperative House Building Society and others 1992 SCMR 19,
Islamic Republic of Pakistan v. Muhammad Zaman Khan and others 1997 SCMR 1508,
Messrs K.G. Traders and another v. Deputy Collector of Customs and 4 others PLD 1997 Kar. 541,
United Bank Limited and others v. Ahsan Akhtar and others 1998 SCMR 68,
Regional Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Region Karachi v. Shafi Muhammad Baloch 1998 SCMR 376,
Mushtaq Ahmed Sabto and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others 2001 PLC (C.S.) 623,
Puri Terminal Ltd. v. Government of Pakistan and 2 others 2004 SCMR 1092,
Messrs Maxim Advertising Company (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Province of Sindh and 4 others 2007 MLD 2019,
M. Yousuf Adil Salim & Co. and 7 others v. Hamid Masood 2007 CLD 916,
Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry v. President of Pakistan and others PLD 2010 SC 61,
ERIN Estate, Galah Ceylon v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras AIR 1958 SC 779,
Mrs. Dino Majekji Chinoy and 8 others v. Muhammad Matin PLD 1983 SC 693,
Mst. Salma Jawaid and 3 others v. S.M. Arshad and 7 others PLD 1983 Kar. 303,
Muhammad Matin v. Mrs. Dino Manekji Chinoy and others PLD 1983 Kar. 387,
Balagamwala Oil Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Shakarchi Trading A.G. and 2 others PLD 1990 Kar. 1,
Imdad Magsi and others v. Karachi Water and Sewerage Board and others PLD 2002 SC 728,
Hussain A. Haroon v. Mrs. Laila Sarfaraz and others 2003 CLC 771,
Justice Khurshid Anwar Bhinder and others v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2010 SC 483
|
| Laws Involved |
Partnership Act, 1932,
Civil Procedure Code, 1908,
Specific Relief Act, 1877
|
| Sections |
32,
O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2,
42,
54
|