A bench of Supreme Court of Pakistan comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Justice M. Javed Buttar on Friday dismissed a leave to appeal filed by Muhammad Saleem Akhtar impugning an order of High Court of Sindh rejecting his suit for arranging DNA test to determine the paternity of his six-year old son.
The appellant, a driver in PIAC was involved in litigation with his former wife Mst Zahida Parveen who secured dissolution of marriage by way of Khula and later sued him for maintenance and return of dowry articles. The appellant who denied parentage once suit for dissolution of marriage and maintenance was filed alleged that Mst Zahida while coming out of court after Khula was granted to her stated that child was not father by him (appellant) in presence of at least four witnesses. This prompted the appellant to file suit seeking orders of the court for conducting a DNA test to establish the parentage of the minor now six years old.
The bench expressed extreme anger over the denial of parentage and legitimacy of the child and said that he must acknowledge that he lived with his wife and son for three years in the same house under one roof. The court advised him to withdraw the appeal or to face a Qazf case (prosecution for lying and levelling wild allegation).
Does the appellant know the consequences if DNA test establishes that child was his, the bench inquired angrily and also asked the counsel for appellant to apprise him of the legal proceedings. He was denying paternity just to shrug off his responsibility towards his child.
The world has changed, such things shall now be eradicated from the society, the bench observed while upholding the impugned order passed by SHC and dismissing the leave to appeal.
HASHMI CAN CO CASE:
A SC bench comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Justice M. Javed Buttar on Friday allowed an appeal filed by 381 retrenched labourers of Hashmi Can Company and remanded counter labour appeal for rehearing by High Court of Sindh.
The bench was hearing a leave to appeal filed by the employees of the company against orders of SHC which allowed a suit filed by respondent any against orders of a labour court on a technical ground.
When the matter came up for hearing, Raja Shamshad advocate appeared for the respondent Hashmi Can Company. The bench at the outset informed him that court has laid hands on the letter issued by Sindh Labour Department with the assistance of Advocate General Sindh.
The company has clearly made a mis-statement before the SHC by denying the existence of the said letter and their appeal was allowed only on technical ground that copy of the impugned letter was not produced before the bench by respondent labourers the bench observed.
The bench consequently held that owners of Hashmi Can Company are liable to be prosecuted for a false statement before a superior court. The bench give time up to 11:30 am to the counsel for the company to seek instructions that whether they are ready to settle the dispute amicably. The bench observed that after retrenchment of the respondent/ appellant labourers, the company, which closed down Can manufacturing unit after obtaining an order from a labour court.
The unit was reopened within less than a fortnight and as per letter of Labour department 150 labourer at work when department carried out an inspection on a complaint lodged by retrenched labourers with the then Labour Minister.
The owner of the company later appearing before the bench stated that company has sustained a colossal loss of 30-40 million rupees and any adverse order would mean unemployment of more workers. The company has lost 90 percent business as plastic items increasingly replaces cans, the owner said.
The court later in its order setting aside the order of SHC ordered that appeal by the company shall be reheard in view of discovery of letter, existence of which was denied by the company as well as to hear appeal pertaining to award of compensation to the labourers by a labour court.
Comments
Comments are closed.