PAKISTAN FILM DISTRIBUTORS ASSOCIATION Versus SANGEET PICTURES

1. The order dated 19‑11‑1986 passed .by the XI Civil Judge, Karachi (South) has been impugned in this revision application. By the impugned order the applicant's application under Order 7, Rule 11, C.P.C. for rejection of the plaint was dismissed. The applicants had stated in the application under Order 7, Rule 11, C.P.C. that the suit was not maintainable and was barred under section 12 (1) of the Trade Organizations Ordinance; 1961 (Ordinance XLII of 1961) as amended by the Trade Organizations (Amendment) Ordinance, 1962 (Ordinance XLV of 1962). From the impugned order it appears that the learned Civil Judge was conscious of the issue involved in the suit and he stated in the impugned order that he would like to frame an issue on the maintainability of the suit at the time of settling the issues. Ch. Rasheed Ahmad states that in view of this observation, this revision application is premature, as the learned Judge himself has stated as mentioned above. The objection of Mr. S.S. Akbar is that he has not stated that he would frame the issue‑and try it as a preliminary issue. I think that the ends of justice would meet if I give direction now that the learned Civil Judge should frame an issue with regard to the maintainability of the suit in view of the provisions of section 12 of the Ordinance XLII of 1961 and try it as a preliminary issue and decide it first. This satisfies all the learned) counsel present.

2. I would, therefore, order accordingly. The revision application stands disposed of in above terms with no order as to costs.

3. H . B . T . /P‑50/ K Order accordingly.