Pakistan Case LawLatest Judgments
Newly reported judgments from the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the High Courts and tribunals, added as they are processed — free, full text, updated daily. Judgments marked NEW were added in the most recent update. 46,805 judgments in total from the Sindh High Court.
- Dr. Q.M. Qarni and another vs Deputy Commissioner (East) and 6 others1986 MLD 191 · Sindh High Court · 1985-09-02Read full judgment →
- Dr. Muhammad Sharif vs The State1986 MLD 2639 · Sindh High Court · 1986-04-16Read full judgment →
- Dr. Muhammad Ilyas vs Bank of Oman Ltd.1986 MLD 110 · Sindh High Court · 1985-11-18Read full judgment →
- DR. M. Murtaza Hussain vs Muhammad Mustafa1986 PLD Karachi 199 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-16Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This First Rent Appeal arises from an order of the Rent Controller granting eviction of the tenant from a shop used as a homeopathic clinic on the ground of personal need under section 15 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. During the appeal, the tenant filed applications under section 21(3) of the said Ordinance seeking to bring on record additional evidence regarding subsequent events to prove the alleged mala fides of the landlord. The core legal questions involved whether additional evidence relating to events occurring after the passing of the impugned order can be allowed under section 21(3), and whether the landlord established bona fide personal need. The High Court held that additional evidence cannot be permitted under section 21(3) if the documents or events did not exist at the time the impugned order of ejectment was passed, as the appellate record is confined to the record of the trial court. The Court further held that the landlord successfully proved bona fide personal need for expansion of his hotel business, while the tenant failed to prove mala fides. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
Questions settled- Whether additional evidence regarding events occurring after the passing of the impugned eviction order can be allowed under section 21(3) of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979?
- What is the scope of 'further enquiry' by an Appellate Authority under section 21(3) of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979?
- On whom lies the burden of proof when a tenant alleges mala fides against a landlord seeking eviction on the ground of personal need?
- Can subsequent events arising after the filing of an appeal be taken into consideration to judge the validity of an impugned eviction order?
- Dr. Abdul Rehman Gora vs Mst. Asya Sultana1986 MLD 1638 · Sindh High Court · 1986-06-01Read full judgment →
- Divisional Superintendent, Pakistan Railway, Karachi vs Presiding1986 PLC 413 · Sindh High Court · 1985-10-12Read full judgment →
- Din Muhammad vs The State1986 P Cr. L J 1973 · Sindh High Court · 1986-01-12Read full judgment →
- Din Muhammad and another vs Hamza and another1986 MLD 293 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-16Read full judgment →
- Dilbar vs The State1986 PLD Karachi 385 · Sindh High Court · 1986-02-25Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This criminal revision application challenges an order rejecting an application under Section 540, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, which sought to recall prosecution witnesses for further cross-examination in a murder trial. The core legal question is whether an accused is entitled to recall witnesses under Section 540, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 solely because a newly engaged counsel wishes to pursue a different line of defense, after the witnesses were already cross-examined by previous counsel. The Court held that the trial court correctly rejected the application and dismissed the revision. The ratio establishes that the power under Section 540, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 is discretionary, and its mandatory component only applies when the court is satisfied that the evidence is essential for a just decision. The principle laid down is that Section 540, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 cannot be invoked merely to facilitate a new counsel's strategy or to repeat cross-examination where a full opportunity was previously afforded, as this would set a dangerous precedent and impede the finality of proceedings.
Questions settled- Can an accused recall prosecution witnesses under Section 540, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 solely because a newly engaged counsel wishes to pursue a different line of defense?
- Is the power to recall witnesses under Section 540, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 mandatory or discretionary?
- Does the mandatory provision of Section 540, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 apply when the evidence is not essential for the just decision of the case?
- Dilawar Ali Khan And Another vs The State and 4 others-1986 P Cr. L J 298 · Sindh High Court · 1985-09-22Read full judgment →
- Debbared and others vs Intizamuddin1986 MLD 985 · Sindh High Court · 1986-03-16Read full judgment →
- Dawood vs The State1986 P Cr. L J 2806(1) · Sindh High Court · 1985-08-04Read full judgment →
- David Vaughan Racklin vs Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks, Karachi1986 MLD 1666 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-18Read full judgment →
- Danish Mand vs Syed Rashid Afzal1986 MLD 141 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-13Read full judgment →
- D.A. Gill and 3 others vs Lahore Diocesan Trust Association and 391986 MLD 942 · Sindh High Court · 1985-03-24Read full judgment →
- CSM Monic Merkartikelen B.V. vs Registrar of Trade Marks1986 MLD 2966 · Sindh High Court · 1986-08-27Read full judgment →
- Crescent Carriers vs Gulzar Ahmad Brothers1986 MLD 813 · Sindh High Court · 1972-03-20Read full judgment →
- Compagnie Continentale (France) S. A. vs Pakistan National Shipping1986 PLD Karachi 447 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-15Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This matter involves an application by defendant No. 1 for the return of a plaint, arguing that the claims against it cannot be entertained under the admiralty jurisdiction of the High Court. The plaintiff, as charterer and owner exercising a lien, sought to recover sub-freight and damages for the illegal arrest of a vessel. The core legal question was whether a claim under section 3(2)(h) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction of the High Court Ordinance 1980 requires the underlying agreement to be strictly between the parties to the suit, and whether a claim in tort for damages for detention of a ship falls within such admiralty jurisdiction. The court held that the words 'any agreement' in section 3(2)(h) should be given a wide meaning and do not require the agreement to be between the parties to the action, but concluded that a claim for damages for illegal detention of a vessel is a claim in tort with no nexus to the contract and therefore cannot be entertained under the admiralty jurisdiction, while the claim for sub-freight arises out of the contract for use and hire of the ship. The application was accordingly dismissed.
Questions settled- Whether section 3(2)(h) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction of the High Court Ordinance 1980 requires the agreement relating to the carriage of goods or hire of a ship to be made directly between the parties to the action?
- Does a claim for damages for the illegal detention or arrest of a ship arise out of an agreement relating to the use or hire of a ship under admiralty jurisdiction?
- Commissioner Of Sales Tax, Cen-Tral Zone, Karachi. vs Shahab IndustriesPTCL 1986 CL. 331 · Sindh High CourtRead full judgment →
- Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Sales Tax, Central Zone. vs Messrs LeverPTCL 1986 St. 142 · Sindh High CourtRead full judgment →
- Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Seth Dhanrajmal Mammal.PTCL 1986 CL. 129 · Sindh High Court · 1984-11-14Read full judgment →
- Commissioner Of Income Tax East Zone. vs Muhammad SadiqPTCL 1986 CL. 135 · Sindh High Court · 1985-08-20Read full judgment →
- Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central Zone). vs Messrs MonotypePTCL 1986 CL. 137 · Sindh High CourtRead full judgment →
- Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central Zone), Karachi. vs M/s. Esso EasternPTCL 1986 CL. 140 · Sindh High CourtRead full judgment →
- Chittagong Steamship Corporation Ltd. vs Central Insurance1986 MLD 59 · Sindh High Court · 1985-03-19Read full judgment →
- Chairman, WAPDA vs Habib Ahmad Hashmi1986 MLD 978 · Sindh High Court · 1984-04-07Read full judgment →
- Chairman, District Council, Hyderabad and another vs Haji Fasihuddin1986 MLD 209 · Sindh High Court · 1985-09-12Read full judgment →
- Ch. Ramzan Masih vs Sher Masih and 2 others1986 MLD 1075 · Sindh High Court · 1986-03-10Read full judgment →
- Ch. Muhammad Bashir vs The State and 7 others-1986 P Cr. L J 78 · Sindh High Court · 1985-09-16Read full judgment →
- Cdr. Anisur Rehman and 5 others vs Bakhsh Illahi1986 MLD 310 · Sindh High Court · 1986-01-11Read full judgment →
- Captain Habib Fadoo vs S. Oimuddin through his Legal Heirs and 3 others1986 MLD 95 · Sindh High Court · 1985-01-13Read full judgment →
- Bijan Mubasher vs The State1986 PLD Karachi 473 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-11Read full judgment →
- Bibojee Services Ltd. vs Interasia Lines Ltd. and another1986 MLD 38 · Sindh High Court · 1985-04-13Read full judgment →
- Begum Nusrat Bhutto and another vs Pakistan through the Secretary1986 MLD 217 · Sindh High Court · 1985-02-27Read full judgment →
- Begum Na Zrul Askari vs Arshad Umer1986 MLD 696 · Sindh High Court · 1984-04-09Read full judgment →
- Begum Ayesha and other vs Messrs Karachi Transport Corporation1986 MLD 69 · Sindh High Court · 1985-05-26Read full judgment →
- Baz Khan vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 119 · Sindh High Court · 1985-10-19Read full judgment →
- Bashir Ahmed vs The State1986 MLD 1795 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-24Read full judgment →
- Bashir Ahmed vs Muhammad Habib1986 MLD 1599 · Sindh High Court · 1986-01-19Read full judgment →
- Basharat Ahmad Khan vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 2005 · Sindh High Court · 1986-03-05Read full judgment →
- Barkatullah Khan vs Mirza Muhammad Hasan1986 PLD Karachi 309 · Sindh High Court · 1985-09-28Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This reference to a Full Bench of the Sindh High Court arose from a conflict of opinion regarding the interpretation of Section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979. The core legal questions were whether a notice under Section 14 requiring a tenant to vacate within sixty days is valid, and whether an eviction application filed after such notice is maintainable. The majority (with Naimuddin, J. dissenting) held that Section 14 is a remedial provision designed to provide a summary and speedy remedy to specified classes of landlords. The court ruled that the requirement to give a minimum of two months' notice is a directory, procedural provision for the benefit of the tenant, rather than a mandatory jurisdictional condition precedent. Consequently, a notice requiring vacation 'within' sixty days is valid, and an application filed thereafter is maintainable, provided that no eviction order is passed before the actual expiry of sixty days from the service of the notice. The court established that technical defects in statutory notices under this section do not invalidate the proceedings.
Questions settled- Is a notice under Section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 calling upon a tenant to vacate within sixty days valid?
- Whether an ejectment application filed under Section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 after service of a notice giving less than two months is maintainable?
- Are the notice requirements under Section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 mandatory or directory in nature?
- Can an eviction order be passed under Section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 before the expiry of sixty days from the date of service of notice?
- Baqar Hussain vs Mst. Jamila Begum1986 MLD 1273 · Sindh High Court · 1986-04-29Read full judgment →
- Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd. vs Ocean1986 MLD 720 · Sindh High Court · 1983-11-30Read full judgment →
- Bahram Khan vs Menthar And Another1986 P Cr. L J 1971 · Sindh High Court · 1986-01-25Read full judgment →
- Bagh Ali and another vs Abdur Rashid1986 MLD 2125 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-21Read full judgment →
- Baboo vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 1791 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-20Read full judgment →
- Aziz Ali vs Leemo through his 5 Legal Heirs1986 MLD 2957 · Sindh High Court · 1986-10-21Read full judgment →
- Aziz Ahmad vs The State1986 MLD 1838 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-26Read full judgment →
- Azam Ayub Khan vs The State1986 P Cr. L J 326 · Sindh High Court · 1985-10-07Read full judgment →
- Ayub Khan Kund1 and another vs The State and another1986 MLD 1071 · Sindh High Court · 1986-04-16Read full judgment →
- Aved Akbar vs Karachi Development Authority and another1986 MLD 179 · Sindh High Court · 1984-11-26Read full judgment →
- Aulad Hussain vs Mst. Khairun Nisa1986 MLD 1669 · Sindh High Court · 1986-06-10Read full judgment →
- Attaullah Zia vs Pakistan Industrial Development Corporation1986 MLD 754 · Sindh High Court · 1984-02-15Read full judgment →
- Aslam vs The State--Opponent1986 P Cr. L J 446 · Sindh High Court · 1985-11-11Read full judgment →
- Asif Anwar and Another vs Messrs Nishibe Kaike Manufacturing1986 PLD Karachi 446 · Sindh High Court · 1986-04-07Read full judgment →
- Ashraf Khan vs Sardar Gul Muhammad1986 M LD 1602 · Sindh High Court · 1985-10-16Read full judgment →
- Ashique Ali vs The State1986 PCr. L J 2888 · Sindh High Court · 1986-08-10Read full judgment →
- Ashiq Ali vs Mustafa Atrinejad1986 MLD 1243 · Sindh High Court · 1986-03-30Read full judgment →
- Asghar Ali vs The State1986 P Cr. L J 1953 · Sindh High Court · 1986-02-05Read full judgment →
- Arshad Muhammad vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 330 · Sindh High Court · 1985-09-21Read full judgment →
- Anwar Khan vs The State1986 P Cr. L J 2313 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-13Read full judgment →
- Amjad Hussain vs Muhammad Ayoub Kafeel and 3 others1986 MLD 1215 · Sindh High Court · 1986-04-19Read full judgment →
- Amir Khan vs K.D.A. through its Chairman and 8 others1986 MLD 1622 · Sindh High Court · 1986-04-23Read full judgment →
- Amir Haider Alias Abbas Ali vs The State- Respondent1986 P C r. L J 4 · Sindh High Court · 1985-08-05Read full judgment →
- Amir Ali And 22 Others vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 30 · Sindh High Court · 1985-01-05Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This judgment disposes of 23 criminal miscellaneous applications filed for the quashment of preventive proceedings initiated against the applicants under the Sind Crime Control Act, 1975. The core legal questions involved the legality of mechanical resort to the proviso to section 5 for issuing non-bailable warrants, the failure to supply copies and particulars of reports under section 6, and the initiation of proceedings based on vague allegations without showing that the applicants were habitual offenders under section 14. The court held that tribunals acted arbitrarily and without jurisdiction by issuing non-bailable warrants and initiating proceedings routinely on vague police reports lacking material particulars of time and place. The court reaffirmed that preventive laws making inroads on personal liberty require strict construction, and that terms like 'habitually' and 'frequently' necessitate proof of a consistent course of conduct over time, rather than isolated or past acts. Consequently, the proceedings against the applicants were quashed.
Questions settled- Whether the mechanical issuance of non-bailable warrants under the proviso to section 5 of the Sind Crime Control Act, 1975 is sustainable without recording reasons of extraordinary urgency?
- Does the mere pendency or past record of isolated criminal cases suffice to establish that a person is a habitual offender under section 14 of the Sind Crime Control Act, 1975?
- What are the mandatory requirements regarding particulars of time, place, and general repute under section 6 of the Sind Crime Control Act, 1975 for initiating valid proceedings?
- Aminuddin Shaikh vs Mst. Mukhtar Begum Sheikh1986 MLD 1784 · Sindh High Court · 1986-04-16Read full judgment →
- Amina Bai and 6 others vs Muhammad Aman and 2 others1986 MLD 1888 · Sindh High Court · 1986-02-05Read full judgment →
- Amin Sardar Bhola vs The M.V. Waseem1986 MLD 2995 · Sindh High Court · 1986-10-04Read full judgment →
- Ameer Ali vs The State1986 P Cr. L J 1670 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-15Read full judgment →
- Amanullah vs Mst. Musarat Bano and 17 others1986 MLD 86 · Sindh High Court · 1985-08-12Read full judgment →
- Altaf Hussain vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 79 · Sindh High Court · 1985-09-30Read full judgment →
- Allied Bank of Pakistan Ltd. vs Messrs Atamaqbool Industries Ltd. and 81986 MLD 2657 · Sindh High Court · 1986-06-28Read full judgment →
- Allied Bank of Pakistan Ltd vs Messrs Oriental Seaford Products and 23 others1986 MLD 1762 · Sindh High Court · 1986-07-05Read full judgment →
- Alley Hassan vs The State1986 PLD Karachi 570 · Sindh High Court · 1986-07-01Read full judgment →
- Allahdino vs S.D.M./Tribunal, Naushero Feroze-1986 P Cr. L J 2973 · Sindh High Court · 1986-09-21Read full judgment →
- Allahdino Shah vs The State1986 P Cr. L J 466 · Sindh High Court · 1985-11-02Read full judgment →
- Allah Warayo and another vs The State1986 MLD 2533 · Sindh High Court · 1986-08-12Read full judgment →
- Allah Din vs Settlement Commissioner, Karachi and another1986 MLD 2999 · Sindh High Court · 1986-10-07Read full judgment →
- Allah Din Khan vs The Chairman, National Industrial Relations1986 PLC 399 · Sindh High Court · 1985-01-16Read full judgment →
- Allah Bux vs Syed Shah1986 MLD 1646 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-07Read full judgment →
- Allah Bakhsh Anal Another vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 1968 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-11Read full judgment →
- Alimuddin And Another vs The StatePTCL 1986 CL. 71 · Sindh High Court · 1983-04-20Read full judgment →
- Ali Shah, Zahid Ali and 2 others vs The State1986 MLD 2477 · Sindh High Court · 1984-10-10Read full judgment →
- Ali Shah and Mamoon Kazi, Rasool Bux and 12 others vs Officer on1986 MLD 1264 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-07Read full judgment →
- Ali Nawaz vs The State1986 MLD 1797 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-28Read full judgment →
- Ali Nawaz And Another vs The State and another1986 P Cr. L J 411 · Sindh High Court · 1983-01-19Read full judgment →
- Ali Muhammad vs Deputy Collector of Customs (Appraisement-1986 MLD 1429 · Sindh High Court · 1986-03-20Read full judgment →
- Ali Muhammad vs Bacho and 2 others1986 MLD 246 · Sindh High Court · 1985-03-30Read full judgment →
- Ali Mohataram Naqvi vs Messrs Cogefar-Astaldi Sidmail1986 PLD Karachi 574 · Sindh High Court · 1986-07-13Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This civil suit arose from a claim by the plaintiff seeking Rs. 45,00,000 as compensation for 30 lac tons of excavated stone aggregate, Rs. 11,10,000 as government royalty, plus interest, against Defendant No. 1 (a foreign construction firm) and Defendant No. 2 (Government of Sindh). The plaintiff alleged that Defendant No. 1 excavated stone without consent from an 800-acre land area covered by a mining permit granted to the plaintiff in August 1969. Defendant No. 1 asserted prior possession for constructing the Super Highway, challenged the permit's validity, and sought indemnity from Defendant No. 2.
The High Court of Sindh dismissed the suit with costs to Defendant No. 1. The Court held that the mining permit was invalid, ineffective, and collusively procured. It determined that the West Pakistan Regulation of Mines and Mineral Development Ordinance, 1958 and the Pakistan Mining Concession Rules, 1960 prevailed over the Sindh Land Revenue Code, 1879. The Court ruled that delegation powers required official Gazette publication, non-compliance with permit conditions rendered rights ineffective, and the plaintiff was estopped by representation due to inaction while Defendant No. 1 openly operated on the land.
Questions settled- Whether federal mineral concession laws override provincial land revenue codes in cases of conflict regarding sub-surface mining rights?
- Whether the failure to publish a statutory delegation of power in the official Gazette invalidates the authority exercised thereunder?
- Does silence or inaction by a permit holder while another party openly occupies land and carries out excavation constitute estoppel by representation?
- Is actual or constructive possession of land necessary for a plaintiff to maintain an action for damages in trespass?
- Ali Mardan vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 1206 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-01Read full judgment →
- Ali Hassan vs The State1986 MLD 1868 · Sindh High Court · 1984-02-08Read full judgment →
- Ali Hassan vs Haji Khamiso And 2 Others1986 P C r. L J 21 · Sindh High Court · -Read full judgment →
- Ali Gul And 3 Others vs The State---Opponent1986 P Cr. L J 433 · Sindh High Court · 1985-02-25Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
The applicants, accused of double murder, sought bail on the grounds that the complainant and eye-witnesses had filed affidavits retracting their earlier statements, effectively patching up the dispute. The trial court, relying on previous jurisprudence, dismissed the application, expressing skepticism regarding the evidentiary value of ex parte affidavits sworn before Oath Commissioners. Upon review, the High Court examined whether such affidavits, which contradict initial statements made during investigation, warrant the grant of bail. The Court held that while trial courts should exercise caution and view such ex parte affidavits with suspicion, they cannot be entirely ignored. The core legal principle established is that when witnesses provide conflicting versions—one in the F.I.R. and another via subsequent affidavits—the court is duty-bound to determine which version is truthful. If the court cannot definitively rely on the initial statement due to the complainant's retraction, the case may fall under the category of 'further inquiry' pursuant to the Code of Criminal Procedure, thereby entitling the accused to bail.
Questions settled- Can bail be granted based on ex parte affidavits of prosecution witnesses retracting their earlier statements?
- Is a court required to evaluate the truthfulness of conflicting statements when a witness retracts their testimony via affidavit?
- Does the filing of retraction affidavits by eye-witnesses constitute a case for 'further inquiry' under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Ali Akbar vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 2437 · Sindh High Court · 1986-03-24Read full judgment →
- Alam vs The State-1986 P Cr. L J 2891 · Sindh High Court · 1986-05-26Read full judgment →
- Al-Nasir vs Karachi Development Authority1986 MLD 701 · Sindh High Court · 1983-11-22Read full judgment →
- Al-Karim Industries vs M.A. Majid Khan through Legal Heirs1986 MLD 928 · Sindh High Court · 1984-04-01Read full judgment →
- Akbar and others vs The State1986 MLD 2177 · Sindh High Court · 1984-06-13Read full judgment →
- Ahsan Ullah vs Pakistan Mineral Development Corporation and 21986 MLD 2973 · Sindh High Court · 1986-04-13Read full judgment →
- Ahmed and 4 others vs R.J. Charania1986 MLD 235 · Sindh High Court · 1985-12-02Read full judgment →