Pakistan Case Law
1971 SCMR 61

Sheikh MOHAMMAD IQBAL AND 3 Others vs AMIR BUX AND Another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1971 SCMR 61
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-64 of 1970
Date1970-08-20
Judge(s)Muhammad Yaqub Ali and Wahiduddin Ahmad
Authored byMuhammad Yaqub Ali
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against a judgment of the High Court, which had refused to interfere with the finding of an arbitrator. The core legal question concerned whether an arbitrator's finding that a disputed sum of Rs. 75,000 standing debited in the names of the respondents was in fact appropriated by the petitioner, and that he was liable to account for the same, was sustainable despite the petitioner's contention that no specific issue was framed on the point. The Supreme Court held that the petition was wholly without substance, noting that the plea had been specifically taken in the written statement and that evidence had been duly brought on the record to support the finding. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, affirming the principle that a party cannot complain of a lack of a formal issue where the matter was squarely raised in pleadings and evidence was led thereon.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether an appellate court can interfere with an arbitrator's finding of fact regarding the misappropriation of partnership funds?
  • Is the absence of a specific issue fatal to an arbitrator's finding when the plea was specifically raised in the pleadings and evidence was led thereon?
petition for leave to appealarbitration awardpartnership accountsframing of issuesappellate interference

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.--The petitioner who appears in person is unable to make out a case for interference by the High Court with the finding of the Arbitrator that the disputed sum of Rs.75,000 which in the books of accounts of the firm stood debited in the names of the respondents was in fact appropriated by the petitioner and that he was liable to account for this sum to the remaining partners of the firm. He tried to argue that no issue was framed on this point. However, as pointed out by the learned Judges in the High Court, the respondents had specifically taken up this plea in para. 7 of the statement of their case. It appears that evidence was also brought on the record on which the disputed finding is based.

2. The petition for leave to appeal is wholly without any substance and is dismissed hereby.

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