Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Appeal No 20 of 1968, decided on 22nd May 1968.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 29th January 1968, in First Appeal from Order No. 82 of 1967).
O. XXXIX, r. 1‑Appeal to Supreme Court against order refusing temporary injunctions Appeal accepted and on consent of parties, partial injunctions restraining Government to realise excise duty pending suit granted.
Roza Kazim, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Masood Akhtar, Attorney for Appellant.
Ghias Muhammad, Attorney‑General of Pakistan (Ahmad Fazal and Malik Muhammad Sharif, Advocates Supreme Court with him) instructed by Iftikhar‑ud‑din Ahmad, Attorney for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 22nd May 1968.
‑The appellant has brought a suit against the respondents in the .Court of a Civil Judge at Rawalpindi, challenging the levy of excise duty on the basis of production capacity of the appellant's Cement Factory. During the pendency of the suit, the appellant applied for a temporary in junction under Order XXXIX, rule 1, read with section 151, of the Code of Civil Procedure, in order to restrain the respondent Government from realizing the excise duty ad interim. This petition was dismissed by the trial Judge, and on appeal a Division Bench of the High Court of West Pakistan affirmed the order. In the course of their judgment, however, the learned Judges expressed certain opinions on the merits of the legal issues raised in the case, though they added the warning to the trial Judge that their conclusions in that regard were tentative only and they should not be interpreted to be the final expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Special leave to appeal was granted in this case, as this was a matter of first impression and the provisions of the relevant‑ statute had not received scrutiny in this Court on any prior occasion.
Mr. Raza Kazim appeared for the appellant before us while the respondents were represented by the learned Attorney‑General of Pakistan. We have heard them both on the propriety of issuing an ad interim injunction in the circumstances of this case. It is agreed between them that if the appellant goes on paying rupees five lacs per mensem, in accordance with the ad interim order of this Court passed on the 11th April 1968, towards the excise duty, and further furnish a personal bond to the Collector of Excise for payment of any sum, out of the arrears of the duty claimed, to the Government, which may after proper check by the Government be found due as a result of the final decision in the suit, the realization of the full duty claimed may remain stayed during the disposal of the suit. The appeal in this Court, therefore, stands disposed of in these terms. There will be no order as to costs in this Court. As the suit is still pending in the trial Court, we should make, it clear that we express no opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the views tentatively expressed by the High Court on the merits of the legal issues arising in the case. The trial Court should not feel itself pressed by that expression of opinion in the High Court's judgment and should be free to decide the case on the merits in accordance with its own judgment.
Appeal partly accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer