M/s Insaf Brothers vs Province of Sindh through Secretary Local Government, Karachi (Central) Ss — 2025 YLR 2004 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2025 YLR 2004 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: YLR
Parties: M/s Insaf Brothers vs Province of Sindh through Secretary Local Government, Karachi (Central) Ss
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

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

M/s Insaf Brothers VS Province of Sindh through Secretary Local Government, Karachi (Central) Ss. 42 & 54---Sindh Public Procurement Rules, 2010, R. 32---Procurement Regulations (Works), Regln No. 7.6(B)(i)(2)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Suit for declaration and injunction---Interim injunction, grant of---Public procurement---Bidding document---Minor and major deviations---Plaintiff / company was aggrieved of issuance of Letter of Award in favour of defendant / company, despite reversal of decision of Procurement Committee by Complaints Redressal Committee (CRC)---Validity---Review Committee disagreed with the CRC and the Project Consultant that deviations in the bidding documents of plaintiff / company were minor---As per Review Committee, the deviations were of mandatory requirements but Review Committee did not notice relevant clause of bidding documents and Regulation No. 7.6(B)(i)(2) of Procurement Regulations (Works) had already classified which deviations were to be treated as minor and which ones as major---As per evaluation report of Project Consultant even bidding documents submitted by defendant / company were with similar minor deviations---Without discussing report of Project Consultant, the Procurement Committee had proceeded to award the contract to the defendant / company, who had quoted the highest price for the Project---Such material aspect of the matter was ignored by Review Committee---Even if the order passed by Review Committee was within its jurisdiction, it was prima facie the result of misreading of record and an erroneous interpretation of the Sindh Public Procurement Rules, 2010---High Court confirmed interim injunction already passed in favour of plaintiff / company---Application was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

2025 YLR 1029 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANAbdul Malik VS State S. 497---Bail order---Observations of Court---Scope---Observations made in a bail order are tentative in nature and sam…
2025 YLR 1778 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSarwat Bibi VS Muhammad Idrees Kiani Double presumption of innocence---Scope---after acquittal, an accused carries double presumption of inn…
2025 YLR 451 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREEjaz Ahmed VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---If a single circumstance creates a reasonable doubt in the mind of a prudent person, then…
2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nadir Hussain VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Single doubt in…
2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Qutubuddin Jakhrani VS State Minor contradictions---Scope---Where in…
2025 YLR 2329 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMrs. Rehana Khatoon VS M/s Delsol the School S.15---Eviction petition---Maintain-ability---Landlord being represented through attorney---Eff…

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