Pakistan Case Law
2004 SCMR 384

PASSCO vs SIDDIQUI & COMPANY

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2004 SCMR 384
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No, 1024-L of 1999
Date2002-07-04
Judge(s)Munir A. Sheikh and Mian Muhammad Ajmal
Authored byMunir A. Sheikh
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition arises from a judgment of the High Court remitting a case to the District Judge for disposal of objections filed against an arbitral award. During the proceedings before the Supreme Court, respondent No. 2, appearing on behalf of all respondents, stated that they decided not to press their objections and accepted the awarded amount without seeking enhancement. The Supreme Court recorded this statement and disposed of the petition as having borne fruits, directing the respondents to appear before the trial Court to withdraw their objections so the award could be made a rule of the Court. It was further ordered that if other respondents do not agree with the withdrawal, the petitioner may seek resurrection of the petition for a decision on merits.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a respondent withdraw objections to an arbitral award before the Supreme Court?
  • What procedure should be followed when parties agree not to press objections to an award?
  • Can a petition be resurrected if co-respondents fail to endorse a withdrawal statement made by one respondent?
arbitration awardobjections to awardwithdrawal of objectionssupreme court petitionrule of the court

' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---Through the judgment dated 14-5-1999 passed by the High Court impugned in this petition, the case has been remitted to the learned District Judge for its entrustment to a Civil Judge for disposal of the objections filed by the respondents against the award dated 14-4- 1991 (Exh.C.1).

2. Anees-ur-Rehman, respondent No,2 who has appeared on behalf of all other respondents says that they have decided not to press these objections and accept the amount awarded to them under the said award as they do not want enhancement of the said amount.

3. In view of this, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this petition has borne fruits.

4. The respondents shall appear before the trial Court and make statement for withdrawal of the objections on which the trial Court shall proceed to make the award rule of the Court.

5. Since Anees-ur-Rehman, respondent only has appeared before us and made statement on behalf of all the respondents, therefore, in case, the other respondents do not agree with him to make statement for withdrawal of the objections and proceed with the same, it would be open to the petitioner to get this petition resurrected for disposal on merits.

6. This petition is hereby disposed of as having borne fruits subject to the above observations. of. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.