KARACHI, Aug 12: The Sindh High Court dismissed on Tuesday a petition seeking release of a betel-nut consignment seized in 1985 while on its way from Quetta to Karachi.
The 13,900-kilogram consignment was seized by the costguards as it was smuggled into the country through its border with Afghanistan. Appearing before the division bench hearing the petition, Deputy Attorney-General Nadeem Azhar Siddiqui submitted that the petitioner had failed to produce any proof of his ownership of the consignment or of it having been duly imported after payment of the customs duty and other dues.
The bench, which consisted of Justices Sabihuddin Ahmed and Syed Ali Aslam Jafri, dismissed the petition as not maintainable.
HBFC CASE: The Sindh High Court on Tuesday dismissed as infructuous a writ petition challenging interest or markup on a house building loan.
The petitioner, who secured a loan of Rs200,000 from the House Building Finance Corporation, had repaid it partially when the Supreme Court declared both interest and markup un-Islamic, illegal and unconstitutional in the year 2000. He challenged the loan recovery demand made by the HBFC.
As the petition came up before a division bench comprising Justices Shabbir Ahmed and Gulzar Ahmed, Deputy Attorney-General Syed Zaki Mohammad submitted that the Supreme Court had already recalled its order in the Aslam Khaki case. The petition that prompted the judgment had since been remanded to the Federal Shariat Court for a fresh hearing and order. The petitioner had no case and was bound by the terms of the contract signed by him with the HBFC.
The bench dismissed the petition as infructuous after hearing the law officer.
ATTACHMENT CASE: The Sindh High Court recalled on Tuesday an attachment order passed by it against the Sindh government and allowed the provincial irrigation department 90 days to satisfy a decree.
A suit for recovery of Rs7 million together with mark-up was instituted by a contractor, who had been commissioned by the irrigation department to repair an embankment. The suit was decreed and the plaintiff filed for its execution. The court ordered attachment of the department funds maintained by the government treasury.
Seeking withdrawal of the attachment order, Additional Advocate-General Abbas Ali submitted that the law provided for a 90-day mandatory period for satisfaction of a decree by a provincial or the federal government, irrespective of any appeal filed by it to challenge the decree. The court had mistakenly ordered execution of the decree by attachment without giving the government a 90-day period.
Justice Ataur Rahman, who heard the withdrawal application, recalled the attachment order and allowed the government a 90-day period commencing on Tuesday to satisfy the decree.