Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Writ Petition No. 47 of 1962, decided on 30th January 1963.
Respondents failing to give correct addresses after first service of notice‑Posting of notices by registered post deemed sufficient service‑Petition heard ex parte‑High Court Rules and Orders (Lahore), Vol. Y, Ch. III‑A, r. 8‑Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98‑Constitution of Pakistan (1956), Art. 170‑Civil Procedure Code (1‑ of 1908), 0. Y‑Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 114, illus. (f) .
Z. H. Lari for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 30th January 1963.
We adjourned the hearing of this case on the 8th of January 1963, because proper steps to give notice to the respondents were not taken. We find now that registered notices, acknowledgment due, were issued on the 12th of January 1963, but the postal acknowledgments have not been received as yet. In the ordinary course, there was sufficient time for their receipt.
2. The office has brought to our notice rule 8, of Chapter III‑A of the Rules and Orders of the High Court of Judicature at Lahore, Volume V, according to which the posting of notices by registered post should be deemed to be sufficient service if the respondents have not given their correct addresses after the first service. The record shows that respondents Nos. 1 14 and 2 were served personally on the 4th of April 1962, but they have not supplied their personal addresses thereafter. Respon dent No. 3 was served on the 24th of March 1962. In these circumstances the office is right in referring to the above mentioned rule and the proviso thereto. In accordance with these provisions we hold the service on the respondents to be good and proceed to hear this writ petition ex parte.
As explained by us in a separate note, respondents Nos. 1 to 3 have not appeared to contest this petition in spite of service on them. The reason suggested by the petitioner for the seizure of a dupe negative of "Yahoodi Ki Larki" was that the film, of which this is a negative, was considered to have been illegally and wrongfully imported into Pakistan. But any objection that there was to the import of the film has been removed according to Mr. Z. H. Lari because the importer has been acquitted.
2. A report purporting to be from the Director of Customs, Intelligence and Investigation was received in this Court in response to an order of this Court. It shows that the dupe negative was seized in the following circumstances :‑
"The originally imported film was subsequently seized for several mis-declarations at the time of importation, as it con travened Martial Law Regulation No. 46. The petitioners had in their possession a dupe negative' made from the said illegally imported film. It was intended to be used for making further copies of the film for exhibition. This was also seized, because otherwise it would have frustrated the very object of the restriction imposed by the Government on the import of films."
3. The objection to the import of the original film and to the possession of dupe negative, according to the above report, was the misdeclarations made by the importer. The importer, we are told, was prosecuted for smuggling, cheating and mis declaration. According to the affidavit of Qasim son‑ of Haji Sattar, who has described himself in the affidavit to be the petitioner and has explained to us that he has done so because he is a partner in the petitioner firm, the importer has been acquitted of all the charges. As there is no contradiction of this statement of facts, and as none of the respondents have taken care to oppose this petition, we presume that this fact has been correctly brought to our notice. In view of it, the necessary conclusion at which we arrive is that the importer himself having cleared of all blame, the holder of a dupe negative of that film cannot be deprived of its possession.
4. In conclusion, we accept the writ petition and direct respondent No. 3, its servants, agents and representatives to return the dupe negative of the film "Yahoodi Kt Larki" seized by respondent No. 1 from Qasim, a partner of the petitioner on the 4th of January 1962.
K. s. A.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer