Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

1988 C L C 1176

1988 C L C 1176

[Karachi]

Before Ajmal Mian and Haider Ali Pirzada, JJ

CALTEX OIL (PAKISTAN) LIMITED‑‑Petitioner

versus

SUKKUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

and another‑‑Respondents

Constitutional Petition No. D‑1213 of 1986, decided on 1st September, 1987.

West Pakistan Municipal Committees Octroi Rules, 1964‑‑

‑‑‑R. 91‑‑Agreement obtaining warehouse‑‑Renewal of‑‑Agreement obtaining warehouse for avoiding payment of octroi on goods not intended to be sold and consumed within Municipal limits was executed between petitioner and respondent Authority for period of three years which was renewable for further period of three years‑‑Clause in agreement containing renewal provision, having been superseded by subsequent agreement, further renewal of agreement, held, could not be claimed by petitioner as a matter of right after expiry of agreement executed for three years.

Noor Muhammad for Petitioner.

Khalid M. Ishaque for Respondent No.2.

A.A. Muhammadally, A . A .‑G . for the State.

ORDER

AJMAL MIAN, J.‑‑This is an application filed by the petitioner whereby the petitioner has prayed the following reliefs:‑

"For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to make an order restraining the respondent No.2 from discontinuing the octroi warehouse set up and maintained at the Sukkur Depot of the petitioner during the pendency of this petition.

It is further prayed that ad interim order as prayed above be passed ex parte urgently."

2. The brief facts leading to‑the filing of the above petition are that the petitioner in terms of Rule 91 of the Municipal Committee Octroi Rules, 1964, obtaining a warehouse agreement from respondent No. 2, for avoiding the payment of Octroi on the goods which were not intended to be sold and consumed within the octroi limits. The initial agreement was, dated 17‑10‑1977 for a period of 3 years which contained clause 23 providing renewal for future term of 3 years. It appears that the above agreement was superseded by agreement,; dated 15th October, 1980, in which clause 23 was modified instead of providing 'for future term of 3 years' were substituted. It is an dmitted position that as per above clause 23 further period of 3 years has expired on 14‑10‑1986. Prima facie it appears that on the basis of the above agreement the petitioner cannot claim further renewal as a matter of right as the renewal contemplated was for a period of 3 years only. However, it was contended by Mr: Noor Muhammad, learned counsel for the petitioner that even in terms of the statutory rules, the petitioner is entitled to maintain the warehouse and to maintain the status quo. We have gone through the Rule 91 which is the relevant rule. Without expressing ourselves definitely on the above contention, it will suffice to observe that no such statutory obligation can be spelt out from the language of the above rule.

We are, therefore, not inclined to grant this application. It is dismissed.

H . B . T . / C‑35/ K Petition dismissed.

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Sindh High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant