LIGHT INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD. THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE versus ZSK STICKMASCHINEN GMBH THROUGH ATTORNEY
Article 28 Civil Code of Conduct (v. 1908), Articles 20 and 9 The Principal and Agent Suits of Plaintiff (Agent) held that the agreement contained exclusive foreign jurisdiction over the contract and that the agreement resolved the dispute. ? They were not the losers of public policy, nor did they violate the provisions of Article 28 of the Contract Act, 1872, nor did the breach of contract be subject to foreign law, in accordance with the relevant clause of the treaty dealing with such breach. And both sides have agreed to fulfill all the obligations of the contract in a foreign court to the exclusive jurisdiction; there was no deliberation in the mind of the contracting party that the claim was made in this case. A claim has been filed by a court of foreign jurisdiction that could deprive the plaintiff of legitimate jurisdiction. , Due to mutual agreement, either of the parties faces difficulty. The decree passed by the High Court in Pakistan could not be enforced in a foreign country as a foreign decision. Appeal was dismissed as there was no mutual agreement between the two governments to implement such orders.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
