AL-AZIZ ROUTE TRANSPORT CO versus ASKARI LEASING LTD
Under Section 9, the plaintiff obtained a lease from the leasing company under an agreement, the lease company, the plaintiff, sought suit on behalf of the leased company to recover the money. On requesting confirmation of an interim order to prevent incoming companies from snatching / forcing them to stop. The only way to clear the case for the plaintiff's recovery was that if the leasing company succeeds in snatching / snatching the buses in question to the claimant, the plaintiff will not be in a position to pay the lease. The leasing company and the City District Government, under a separate agreement, were responsible for paying the plaintiff up to six percent of the lease rent markup amount that they failed to pay and, therefore, The plaintiff failed to pay the lease that the regular rent and payment by the leasing company was valid, however, if the defendant at the present stage sought the protection provided by the interim order, the plaintiff would have been seriously prejudiced. Will suffer irreparable damage and injury as the leasing company will handle the buses. And he will do the same auction which will not only result in financial loss to the plaintiff but at the same time the leasing company may not be in a position to receive its due High Court in the interest of both the parties, it has been observed that the plaintiff. Will continue If the bus company is allowed to lease without the defense of the plaintiff, it would be frustrating to them that it would not be in the interest of any of the High Courts, under the circumstances, the ad interim order
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
