PAK FEEDERS Versus SULTAN POULTRY FARM

ORDER

1. JAVID IQBAL, J.‑‑ In this petition for leave to appeal the petitioners have assailed the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 5th July, 1981. The petitioners manufacture feed for chickens and sell it on payment. The respondent purchased chicken feed manufactured by the petitioners and gave it to their poultry as a result according to the respondent 1,057 birds died due to food poisoning and the growth of others was adversely affected. Consequently they brought a suit against the petitioners for damages to the tune of Rs.24,500. The suit was decreed by the Civil Judge in favour of respondent for the amount of Rs.23,280. The petitioners challenged the judgment and decree of the trial Court in appeal which was dismissed. Thereafter, they filed B.S.A. in the Lahore High Court, Lahore which was also dismissed by the learned Single Judge. Hence the present petition.

2. It was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in this case post‑mortem examination was conducted only of seven birds and the opinion was expressed to the effect that all the birds had been killed by food poisoning. It was, therefore, urged that this was not proper mode for arriving at the conclusion that the poultry had died because of food poisoning. It was then submitted that the feed manufactured by the petitioners was never chemically got examined in order to determine whether it contained any poisonous element or not. It was finally submitted that there was misreading of evidence in this case and that, therefore, the suit should have not been decreed in favour of the respondent.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners we note that the finding of fact that the poultry of the respondent had been killed by the feed which had been manufactured by the petitioners and supplied to the respondent for feeding the birds, had been upheld throughout as against the petitioners.

4. In that view of the matter the impugned judgments of the Courts below as well as that of the high Court call for no interference. This petition has no merit and is, therefore, accordingly dismissed.

5. M.I./P‑53/S Petition dismissed.