PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Excise and Taxation Department, Lahore vs MURREE BREWERY COMPANY LIMITED (MBCL) Ss — 2021 SCMR 305 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation
2021 SCMR 305 SUPREME-COURT
Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year
2021
Reporter
SCMR
Parties
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Excise and Taxation Department, Lahore vs MURREE BREWERY COMPANY LIMITED (MBCL) Ss
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 79; Civil Procedure Code

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Excise and Taxation Department, Lahore VS MURREE BREWERY COMPANY LIMITED (MBCL) Ss. 79, 153, O. I, R. 10 & O. XXVII-a---Constitution of Pakistan, art. 174---Suits by or against the Government---Section 79 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908---Whether a mandatory provision---Effect of non-compliance---Held, that as a matter of general principle, the provision of S. 79 of C.P.C. was a mandatory provision which was applicable where the correct and appropriate department was not made party to the suit and/or the Government was wrongly impleaded---Such non-¬compliance would render the suit invalid for the want of necessary party---However, S. 79 of C.P.C. was not to be used as a ground for a technical knockout---Where the Government itself filed the appeal, albeit with the wrong description, the provisions of S. 79 of C.P.C. amounted to mere nomenclature, which, if not followed, did not render the suit non-maintainable. Citation Name: 2021 SCMR 305 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Excise and Taxation Department, Lahore VS MURREE BREWERY COMPANY LIMITED (MBCL) 'Mandatory' and 'directory' provisions---Test for distinction---Test to determine whether a provision was directory or mandatory was by ascertaining the legislative intent behind the same---Integral factor that was to be considered was the legislative intent and the purpose that was to be achieved by the application of the provision---General rule was that the usage of the word `shall' generally carried the connotation that a provision was mandatory in nature---However, other factors such as the object and purpose of the statute and inclusion of penal consequences in cases of non-compliance also served as an instructive guide in deducing of the provision.

Other judgments reported in 2021 SCMR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English