Citation Name: 2024 PLD 573 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ASHFAQ BROTHERS vs ANTI-DUMPING APPELLA

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

Citation Name: 2024 PLD 573 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ASHFAQ BROTHERS VS ANTI-DUMPING APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN S. 70(13)---Orders passed by the Anti-Dumping Appellate Tribunal (Islamabad), assailing of---Lahore High Court, territorial jurisdiction of---Scope---Forum non conveniens, doctrine of---Appellants were importers of various commodities subjected to duties under the Anti-Dumping Duties Act, 2015 ('the Act 2015')---Appellants preferred appeal, before the Lahore High Court, against orders passed by the Anti-Dumping Appellate Tribunal situated at Islamabad ("Appellate Tribunal")---Contention of the appellants was that they were residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court and it would be convenient for them to invoke its jurisdiction---Plea of the official respondents was that the appellants had changed their addresses with mala fide intent, so said jurisdiction could not be assumed on their convenience---Validity---Cause of action, in the present case, arose either at Islamabad or Karachi and even the present appellants while preferring their appeals before the "Appellate Tribunal" mentioned their addresses of places other than Rawalpindi city---Apparently, the appellants had now changed addresses for their convenience or for any other reason best known to them---Court cannot assume jurisdiction on the whims of the parties or to facilitate any of them---Doctrine of forum non conveniens is founded on the principle that if some other forum is more appropriate and the interest of justice would be served better, the Court may decline to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a case could be suitably tried by another Court---However, said principle, being a discretionary power, allows courts to dismiss a case where another court, or forum, is much better suited to hear the case, having competent jurisdiction, which is the appropriate forum---Word "High Court" used in subsection (13) of S. 70 of the Act 2015 corresponds to Islamabad High Court and, as such, the Lahore High Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to ponder upon the decision of the "Appellate Tribunal"---Resultantly, all the appeals were returned to the appellants to present the same to the Court of competent jurisdiction---Appeals were disposed of accordingly. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 573 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ASHFAQ BROTHERS VS ANTI-DUMPING APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN S. 70 (13)---Orders passed by the Anti-Dumping Appellate Tribunal (Islamabad), assailing of---Lahore High Court, territorial jurisdiction of---Scope---Appellants were Importers of various commodities subjected to duties under the Anti-Dumping Duties Act, 2015 ('the Act 2015')---Appellants preferred appeal, before the Lahore High Court, against orders passed by the Anti-Dumping Appellate Tribunal, situated at Islamabad ("Appellate Tribunal")---Contention of the appellants was that since the "Appellate Tribunal" was performing functions in connection with affairs of the Federation, so appeal could be adjudicated by any of the High Courts against its decision while it was negligence on the part of the Federation that it failed to establish Benches at Lahore, Karachi, Quetta and Peshawar and the appellants could not be penalized on that score---Plea of the official respondents was that decision of the "Appellate Tribunal" could only be assailed before the Islamabad High Court and that not only order in original, but order in appeal were passed at Islamabad---Validity---Decision of the "Appellate Tribunal" is appealable under subsection (13) of S. 70 of the Act 2015, and it is evident from (the wordings of) said S. 70(13) that an appeal against the decision of the "Appellate Tribunal" lies before the High Court---However the term "High Court" is nowhere defined in the Act 2015---"Appellate Tribunal" is performing functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation---Admittedly, in the present case, initially investigation was started at Islamabad, which resulted into passing of order in original; the said order was assailed through an appeal before the "Appellate Tribunal" under Ss. 70(1)(2) & 70 of the Act 2015", which decided the same through impugned order---Thus, the word "High Court" used in subsection (13) of S. 70 of the Act 2015 corresponded to Islamabad High Court and, as such, the Lahore High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to ponder upon the decision of the "Appellate Tribunal"---Resultantly, all the appeals were returned to the appellants to present the same to the Court of competent jurisdiction---Appeals were disposed of accordingly.

Citation Name: 2024 PLD 573 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ASHFAQ BROTHERS vs ANTI-DUMPING APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN S — 2024 PLD 573 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD