Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 166 of 1980, decided on 18th May, 1982.

(Against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 2nd February, 1980 passed in I. C. A. No. 2‑Com. of 1977).

----Art. 185 (3)‑Petition for leave to appeal‑Point not taken up by petitioner before Division Bench of High Court‑Not allowed to be raised before Supreme Court‑Petition dismissed.

Mahmud Ali Kasuri, Advocate Supreme Court and M. A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Raja Muhammad Akram, Advocate Supreme Court with M. Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 1.

Nemo for Respondent No. 2.

Sardar Sami Hayat, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 3.

Date of hearing : 18th May, 1982.

The facts giving rise to this petition are, briefly, that Pakistan Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation advanced several loans in foreign exchange currency to the petitioner‑Company for the establishment and extension of its business on certain terms which had been formally reduced into writing. The petitioner‑Company was, however, unable to meet its liabilities whereupon respondent No. 1 initiated proceed ings against it under section 162 of the Companies Act, for winding up of the Company and for appointment of a Liquidator. This petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court, vide judgment order dated 18‑1‑1977.

Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed an I. C. A., which was heard and dismissed by a Division Bench of the same High Court, vide judgment dated 2‑2‑1980. Hence the present Petition.

2. The only point urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that the respondent who had advanced a secured debt could not move the Court for winding up unless it had surrendered the security. It was objected that this contention had not been raised before the learned Division Bench of the High Court against which order. Leave to Appeal is being sought. The petitioner's counsel took up the position that this contention had been urged though in another form.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, examining the record and going through the relevant portion of the impugned judgment we find that this point was not taken up by the petitioner before the Division Bench of the High Court. He cannot, therefore, be permitted to raise the same at this stage. The petition is consequently dismissed.

Leave petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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