| Case ID |
67d802f4-9cfa-4c9f-bbf7-f80cfe2f4318 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Revision Application No. 212 of 1989 |
| Decision Date |
Aug 12, 1990 |
| Hearing Date |
Dec 10, 1989 |
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court dismissed the revision application filed by Pakistan National Shipping Corporation, affirming the lower court's decision that the suit for compensation for loss or injury to goods was not barred by the limitation period. The court held that the relevant limitation period was one year from the date of occurrence of loss or injury, which in this case was determined to be the date when the loss was surveyed and assessed. The court found that the applicants had extended the limitation period by their own actions, allowing the suit to be filed within the permissible timeframe. The court emphasized that the date of occurrence of loss does not always coincide with the date of discharge of goods, and that mutual consent can extend the period of limitation in accordance with the principles of private international law. Hence, the applicants' arguments regarding the limitation period were rejected, leading to the dismissal of the revision application. |
| Summary |
The case of Pakistan National Shipping Corporation vs. National Insurance Corporation revolves around the interpretation of limitation periods under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act and the Limitation Act. The Sindh High Court addressed the critical issues of when the limitation period begins to run in cases of loss or injury to goods. The court clarified that the limitation period for filing a suit for compensation is one year from the occurrence of the loss or injury, which is not necessarily the date the goods were discharged. The applicants contended that the suit was barred by limitation since the goods were discharged on January 15, 1980. However, the court found that a survey was conducted on January 24, 1980, which determined the extent of the loss, thus starting the limitation clock. The court also recognized the applicability of mutual consent in extending the limitation period, stating that an acknowledgment of liability or a fresh agreement could effectively reset the limitation timeline. This decision reinforces the principles of contract law and limitation periods in maritime cases, emphasizing the importance of accurate assessment and timely action in claims for lost or damaged goods. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
WAJIHUDDIN AHMED, J
|
| Lawyers |
Nasim-ud-Din Shaikh for Applicants,
A.R. Siddiqi for Respondent (absent)
|
| Petitioners |
PAKISTAN NATIONAL SHIPPING CORPORATION
|
| Respondents |
NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION
|
| Citations |
1991 SLD 1745,
1991 CLC 712
|
| Other Citations |
Deutsche Dampschiffaharts-Gesellschaft v. Central Insurance Company P L D 1975 Kar 819,
United Electric and Refrigeration Company v. Veb Deutsche Seere Darex, Rostock East Germany 1980 C L C 921,
Karachi Steam Navigation Company Limited v. Ibrahim Ghani P L D 1957 Kar. 315,
Abdul Jalil Choudhry v. Muhammadi Steamship Company P L D 1961 S C 340,
Federation of Pakistan v. Raja Fazal Dad Khan P L D 1954 Lah. 635,
British India Steam Navigation Co. Ltd v. Abdul Razak-Abdul Kader P L D 1967 SC 68,
Premier Insurance Company Limited v. Irans Occeanic Steamship Company Limited P L D 1980 Kar. 54
|
| Laws Involved |
Carriage of Goods by Sea Act,
Contract Act,
Limitation Act,
Qanun-e-Shahadat
|
| Sections |
IV, para. 1,
63,
19,
30,
31,
114
|