U.I.G. (PVT.) LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR versus MUHAMMAD IMRAN QURESHI
Section 42 Arbitration Act (X of 1940), Sections 21 and 34 Civil Procedure Code (V 1908), Sections 89A and OX, R 1A High Court arbitrate the matter on the basis of a joint consent statement under its original jurisdiction. Referring to the order passed. The shareholders of the same company made by the plaintiff, representing the plaintiff and the other plaintiff, asserted that the company was not a party to the case and the consent of the plaintiffs was not obtained. Waldetti Company is a family concern and can be treated as a partnership concern, saying that the other plaintiffs / appellants, being in the majority, are entitled to run the affairs of the company but they have other shareholders participating in the company's affairs. Could not be prevented except that according to the agreement on the law, the Accord showed that the lawyer had the power to compromise, no charge of exceeding the authority was levied against the lawyer who had the interest of the company and the plaintiff. Were the same. They cannot take advantage of the corporate veil to provoke an order based on a statement made by any of the plaintiffs. The refusal of a party to any party at any stage of the proceeding, even after the dismissal of an application under section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, under section 21 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, shall Will not be banned. The parties involved in this case can apply to the court for a mediation reference order at any time before deciding under Arbitration 89A and OX, R 1A; Should also adopt alternative methods that include meditation, meditation. Or end the dispute
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
