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

CANTONMENT BOARD CLIFTON vs NADIM AHMED ANSARI S — 2025 PLD 36 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2025 PLD 36 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
PLD
Parties
CANTONMENT BOARD CLIFTON vs NADIM AHMED ANSARI S
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 273---C; S. 70---R; S. 273; S. 70; Contract Act (IX of 1872); Cantonments Act; Contract 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

CANTONMENT BOARD CLIFTON VS NADIM AHMED ANSARI S. 273---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 70---Recovery of money---Statutory notice, non-issuance of---Plea not raised---Obligation of person enjoying benefit of non-gratuitous act---Scope---Appellant/ Cantonment Board assailed judgment and decree passed in favour of respondents/plaintiffs to pay money for the services rendered---Plea raised by appellant/Board was that no notice under S.273 of Cantonments Act, 1924, was issued by respondents/plaintiffs prior to filing of suit---Validity---When appellant/Cantonment Board remained silent in its written statement about S. 273 of Cantonments Act, 1924, it had implicitly waived the protection under S. 273 of Cantonments Act, 1924---Appellant/Board was estopped from raising such plea subsequently which was a curable defect---Provision of S. 70 Contract Act, 1872, provides three requirements: (i) party claiming compensation must do something for another or deliver something to the party from whom he is claiming compensation; (ii) claimant must not intend to do the act or deliver goods gratuitously; and (iii) party from whom he is claiming must enjoy benefit of the act or goods---Respondents/plaintiffs satisfied all three ingredients of S. 70 of Contract Act, 1872---Even if there was neither any contract nor contractual term fixing compensation of service rendered, respondents/plaintiffs were even then entitled to compensation "quantum meruit" from appellant/Board---Division Bench of High Court declined to interfere in judgment and decree passed by Trial Court as the same had been passed on proper appreciation of facts and law and did not suffer from any illegality---Intra Court Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD

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