TRIBAL TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED vs Malik NOWSHERWAN And Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court, which had dismissed the petitioner's writ petition regarding labour disputes. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court erred in its dismissal by failing to consider material evidence, specifically audited balance sheets (Exhibits P.1 and P.4), which the petitioner contended proved the financial losses leading to the closure of the Mills. The petitioner further argued that the High Court misconstrued the precedent established in South British Insurance Employees' Union v. The Sindh Labour Court No.4 and others (1975 SCMR 49). The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the contentions, found merit in the petitioner's claim that the High Court's judgment was potentially based on the non-reading and overlooking of material evidence. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal, directed the provision of security, and ordered the appeal to be prepared on the existing record with liberty for parties to submit further documentation for an early hearing.
- Does a High Court judgment based on the non-reading of material evidence warrant interference by the Supreme Court?
- Can a failure to consider audited balance sheets in a labour dispute constitute a valid ground for challenging a High Court decision?
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.---The writ petition filed by the petitioner-Mills was dismissed, inter alia, on the ground that the Labour Courts had found against the petitioner because neither the record of the office nor the audit reports were produced to enable it to examine the propriety or otherwise of the ground that the Mills were closed on account of the financial losses suffered by it.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that before the High Court it was pointed out that the balance-sheets had been placed on the record (Exs.P.1 and P.4) which reflected the audited accounts of the petitioner Mills.
3. It is, accordingly, contended that the judgment of the High Court is based on non-reading and overlooking of material pieces of evidence. It is also submitted that the judgment of this Court entitled South British Insurance Employees' Union v. The Sindh Labour Court No.4 and others (1975 SCMR 49) has not been properly construed by the High Court.
4. Security in the sum of Rs.5,000.
5. The appeal shall be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to add further documents and put up for hearing at a very early date.