MIRPURKHAS SUGAR MILLS LIMITED vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Ss — 2022 CLD 352 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2022 CLD 352 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2022
Reporter: CLD
Parties: MIRPURKHAS SUGAR MILLS LIMITED vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Ss
Subject matter: Civil
Provisions referred to: S. 11---S; Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908); Competition Commission Act

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

MIRPURKHAS SUGAR MILLS LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Ss. 3, 4, 10, 38 & 62---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 13, 18, 142, 143 & 151---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 11---Sugar industry--- Legislation, competence of---Free competition---Proceedings---Principles of "double jeopardy" and "res-judicata"---Applicability---Petitioners were sugar mills and their Association who assailed show cause notices issued by authorities on the ground that it was a Provincial subject and Federal laws were not applicable---Validity---Held, it was the Parliament, with jurisdiction all over the country, to legislate over the subject when it related to sugar mills---Undertaking having presence in more than one province physically and effectively, to ensure free competition in trade, commerce, etc. was duty and domain of the Federation---Federal law enacted by Parliament could meet the issue and serve national economy for assigned purpose, which was what the scheme of Arts. 18 & 151 of the Constitution, which had stipulated: free trade, commerce and intercourse throughout Pakistan with free competition and consumer protection---Any past proceedings by the Commission against Sugar Mills Association, mother association, would not render proceedings against petitioners to find out their part, if any, in prohibited agreements either nullity in the eyes of law or hit by doctrine of "double jeopardy" or "res judicata"---If any undertaking was found in breach of a provision of the Competition Commission Act, 2010, it was to be held accountable for its individual act but when it had committed such breach in its dual capacity i.e. individual and a part of the Association, such undertaking could be made answerable separately for its actions

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLD

2022 CLD 1051 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIMADINA BREEDING (PVT.) LIMITED VS SINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY S. 1---Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Review of Initial Envi…
2022 CLD 626 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHISINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY VS DIAMOND RESIDENCY through Owner/ Chief Executive Officer Ss. 17 & 1---Initial environmental examina…
2022 CLD 502 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIARIF BELGAUMI VS SINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (SEPA) S. 17---Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Review of Initial Environmental…
2022 CLD 233 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIRAFHAN MAIZE PRODUCTS COMPANY LTD. VS DIRECTOR GENERAL, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, GOVERNMENT OF SINDH Ss. 11, 13 & 14---Prohibition o…
2022 CLD 970 SUPREME-COURTSHEZAN SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS SHEZAN BAKERS AND CONFECTIONERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED S. 5(1)---Revised Trade Marks Rules, 1963 [since repe…
2022 CLD 970 SUPREME-COURTSHEZAN SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS SHEZAN BAKERS AND CONFECTIONERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED Ss. 6, 8(a) & 10(1)---Revised Trade Marks Rules, 1963…

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