Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

BILAL JAMIL versus AL-AZAM LTD.


O XXXIX, r 4 The merger leave of the plaintiff (building company) who allotted the second plaintiff in question and before the plaintiff entered her second court status for several numbers. The possibility of continuing the vacant flats continued. Holding Years: In order to vacate the injunction under appropriate and appropriate circumstances, the defendant (building company) may occupy the allotted defendant that he will not take possession of the flats or make any charge or pen. [Integration]

1981 C L C 1032

[Karachi]

Before Ajmal Mian, J

BILAL JAMIL‑Plaintiff

versus

AL‑AZAM LTD. AND ANOTHER‑ Defendants

Suit No. 155 of 1978, decided on 31st May, 1980.

(a) Contract Act (IX of 1872)‑------

‑‑ S. 11‑Minor's contract‑No express plea raised in plaint as to agreements executed by father having been executed as guardians on behalf of minor sons‑Agreements thus executed whether void. (Quaere).

I L R 1930 Cal. 539 : I L R 19 Lab. 313 ; Abdur Rehman v. Abdul Haq and others P L.D 1965 Kar. 625 ; N. Sankaranarayana Pillayan and others v. The Board of Commissioner, for the Hindu Religious Endowments Madras and another P L D 1947 P C 304 ; Mst. Amnat v. Mahoob Hussain P L D 1959 Kar. 362 and Mohammad Mursaleen v. Syed Noor Mohammad Hussaini P L D 1968 Kar. 163 ref.

(b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑-----

‑‑ O.II, r. 2 & Ss. 11 & 12‑Contention that suits on same subject having been previously filed fresh suits barred, held, not without force.

Hoosain Bux and others v. Dur Muhammad and others P L D 1963 Kar. 969 and Abdul Latif Sahib and another v. Bathula Bibi Ammal A I R 1914 Mad. 360 ref.

(c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)‑---

‑‑ S. 27(6)‑Defendants being bona fide purchasers, held, protected under S. 27(6).

(d) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑-----

‑‑ O. XXXIX, r. 4‑Injunction‑Vacation of‑Defendant (Building Company) having allotted flats in question to other defendant and received payment before plaintiff filed his earlier suit in another Court‑Status quo order it allowed to continue likely to render flats lying vacant for a number of years‑Held : Just and proper in circumstances to vacate injunction with condition that defendant (building company) may hand over possession to allottee‑defendant subject to undertaking not to let out or part with possession of flats or create any charge or pen1036Eance without permission of High Court. [ Injunction].

Mr. Rehmani for Plaintiff.

Liaquat Merchant for Defendant No. 2.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
famous supreme court advocate from Jhal Magsi lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.