Find a Lawyer

PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION versus ACT AIRLINES INC.

Section 136 and A-XXXVIII, suit for recovery of the lease rental agreement between the parties with respect to the R1 aircraft engines, before the plaintiff requesting the plaintiff for breach of such agreement by the airline company. The arrest of the aircraft and the accompanying application will keep him from financial loss and the very purpose of filing a lawsuit will be frustrated, if the defendant's plane is likely to leave Pakistan, he was not arrested and not connected. went. The High Court directed Civil Aviation Atlee Forti to issue necessary directions to the airport authorities to prevent such aircraft from departing. Pakistan's territorial jurisdiction hearing is subject to a court deposit or bank guarantee until a later date, after which such aircraft will be released without further court orders. \ R \ n

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011

• ALI HASSAN v. State 2011 MLD 700
• KHADIJA EDIBLE OIL REFINERY (PVT.) LTD. 2011 CLD 709
• GHULAM MURTAZA v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Cabinet Division 2011 PLC(CS) 709
• FURQAN QADRI v. State 2011 YLR 711
• WAHID BUX v. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION MIR PUR MATHELO 2011 PCrLJ 717
• SHAHNAWAZ BALOCH v. Kazi MUHAMMAD TAQI 2011 PLC(CS) 723
• MUHAMMAD HANIF BANGASH v. State 2011 YLR 727
• MUHAMMAD IQBAL v. DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, EVACUEE TRUST PROPERTY BOARD, KARACHI 2011 CLC 731

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2011 →

advocate for immigration from Mubarik Pur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes