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

R. M. GULISTAN versus KARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION


Seventh-twelfth, the defendant claims to have raised the costs during the work related to the building contract support from the defendant by the defendant to the Local Fund Audit defendants from the total bill provided by the defendant. Approving the cement price deduction and raising the net amount instead of the total amount of moving bills, directed the controlling authority to pay the total amount of bills running before the due date. The defendant himself constitutes admission on the total amount of the bills running, contradicting the defendant's conduct, based on the interpretation given to the various departments and is entitled to admission or No, entry cannot be justified.

1981 C L C 1500

[Karachi]

Before Ajmal Mian, J

R. M. GULISTAN‑Petitioner

versus

XARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION‑Respondent

Suit No. 174 of 1978, decided of 23rd September, 1979.

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

‑‑‑‑ O. XII, r. 6‑Decree on admission awarded building contract by defendant for a lump sum‑Plaintiff making claim for escalation of prices during execution of work‑Defendant paying certain amounts to plaintiff towards their claim for escalation oil basis of recommendation of a Committee‑‑On objection by Assistant Direc tor Local Fund Audit. defendant deducting price of cement supplied by defendant from gross bill and granting escalation on net amount instead of gross amount of running bills‑Controlling Authority directing plaintiff to be paid escalation on gross amounts of running bills prior to a certain date‑Defendant paying escalation on gross amounts of running bills‑Plaintiff contending such conduct of defendant itself constituted admission on its part‑Held, admission cannot be spelt out on basis of interpretation given various departments to rule and whether plaintiff entitled to receive escalation on gross amounts of running bills or on net amounts, an issue to be decided at trial of suit. ‑[Admission].

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

-----O. VI, r. 6‑Service of notice‑Presumption‑‑‑Defendant contending---no statutory notice having been served upon it before filing of suit and so plaintiff not entitled to costs or interest‑Defendant not raising any such plea in written statement‑‑Held : Non‑service of notice cannot be presumed in circumstances.‑[Pleadings].

Muhammad Ali Sayeed for Plaintiff.

Muslim Naqvi for Defendants.

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
lawer from fb area from Kunjah 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.