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

SIDDIQSONS ENERGY LIMITED vs PRIVATE POWER AND INFRASTRUCTURE BOARD (PPIB) O — 2024 CLD 18 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Citation
2024 CLD 18 ISLAMABAD
Court
Islamabad High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
CLD
Parties
SIDDIQSONS ENERGY LIMITED vs PRIVATE POWER AND INFRASTRUCTURE BOARD (PPIB) O
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 94

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

SIDDIQSONS ENERGY LIMITED VS PRIVATE POWER AND INFRASTRUCTURE BOARD (PPIB) O. XXXVIII, R. 5 & O. XXXIX, Rr. 1, 2---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), Ss. 42 & 54---Suit for declaration, injunction and recovery of damages---Encashment of performance guarantee---attachment before judgment---Proceeds of performance guarantee---Plaintiff company resisted encashing of performance guarantee by defendant Board on the ground that notice of demand was defective---Trial Court declined to issue interim injunction against encashing of performance guarantee---Validity---Proceeds of performance guarantee drawn and resting with defendant Board were not property of plaintiff company, for that would essentially tantamount to rendering judgment for plaintiff company---Essential conditions under O. XXXVIII, R. 5, C.P.C., for attachment before judgment did not demonstrate circumstances to identify that defendant authorities intended to dispose of its assets to defeat any decree that might be passed in favour of plaintiff company---High Court declined to order deposit of the proceeds of performance guarantee with Court, as such order would be practically equivalent to an attachment before judgment and the relief was molded accordingly---High Court in exercise of jurisdiction under S. 94(e), C.P.C., directed defendant authorities to report to Trial Court immediately if and when total net realizable value of its liquid plus near-cash equivalent assets would decline to an amount which was equal (i) the total sum of the provisioning for sums in litigation in its accounts, (ii) plus the sum of plaintiff company's performance guarantee encashed by defendant authorities [if not included in (i)], and (iii) plus 10 percent of the sum of (i) and (ii) above---High Court further allowed that plaintiff company may file an application for appropriate orders, including attachment before judgment, and Trial Court would then pass an order on such application---application was disposed of accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLD

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