FLY DUBAI vs Syed YAWAR HUSSAIN O — 2026 CLC 334 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

FLY DUBAI VS Syed YAWAR HUSSAIN O.XLI, R.31---appellate court is required to determine points for determination, the decision on those points, and the reasons for the decision. Citation Name: 2026 CLC 334 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case FLY DUBAI VS Syed YAWAR HUSSAIN S.100---Second appeal---Parameters of interference---Right to file second appeal can be set into motion only when the decision is contrary to law; fails to determine some material issue of law, and substantial error or defect in the procedure provided by the Code or law. Citation Name: 2026 CLC 334 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case FLY DUBAI VS Syed YAWAR HUSSAIN S.100 & O.XLI, R.31---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), First Sched., Art. 62---Suit for recovery amount---Limitation---Computation and determination---Accrual of cause of action---Effect of recurring/continuing correspondence between the parties---Computation of limitation period from date of last refusal---Effect---The respondent filed suit for recovery of certain outstanding amounts allegedly reflected in statements of account exchanged between the parties during 2015-2021---The suit was initially rejected under O.VII R.11, C.P.C., but the appellate court remanded the matter for a decision on merits---After trial, the suit was dismissed by the Trial Court on the ground of limitation, but the first appellate court reversed that decision and decreed the claim---The present second appeal arose from this reversal, raising the issue as to "whether the suit was barred by limitation and whether the appellate court had correctly relied upon the email-based statements of account sent by the appellant as constituting a workable basis for the decree?"---Held: Cross examination of the appellant revealed that appellate had conceded to the cause of action arising in the year 2021---The email of 2021 had been admitted by the appellant and in this regard, High Court agreed with the findings of the appellate court that even if it is presumed that Art.62 of the Limitation Act of 1908 was applicable to the present case, even then the suit filed by the respondent was within the prescribed period of limitation---The time, it was held, was correctly calculated from the date of refusal i.e.04.03.2021, by the appellate court---Statements of accounts admittedly sent by the appellant through the email reflected the amount owed to the respondent---The said statement of accounts had not been denied by the appellant's witness---It was also admitted that the appellant did not produce their accountant before the Trial Court to rebut the claim of the respondent---It was further held that once the statement of accounts was exhibited by the respondent before the Trial Court, the burden shifted to the appellant to disprove the same for which he made no such effort---Trial Court needlessly deliberated, very extensively, on the applicability of various Articles of the Limitation Act 1908, without appreciating that the cause of action arose in the favour of the respondent lastly on 04.03.2021---Once this apparent conclusion was reached the deliberation regarding the applicability of various Articles under the Limitation Act, 1908 became futile---Present second appeal was devoid of any merits---Suit of the respondent was decreed in the sum of Rs.4,617,021.62/---Present appeal was dismissed, in circumstance.

FLY DUBAI vs Syed YAWAR HUSSAIN O — 2026 CLC 334 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLC