ABAID ULLAH KHAN, J.--This appeal assails the validity of the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge, Lahore, dated the 24th March, 1986, whereby the respondent's suit for recovery of Rs.37,49,764.00 was decreed and the appellant was directed to pay interest at the rate of twelve per cent per annum on the decretal amount till its realisation. The Batala Engineering Company (Pakistan) Limited, Lahore, the predecessor in interest of the appellant, Pakistan Engineering Company Limited, Lahore, entered into agreement with the respondent, Terni S.PA., an Italian Company, on the 12th December, 1963, to work in collaboration with each other on designing, fabricating and erection work for gates and gearing equipment for Quadarabad and Rasul Projects of WAPDA. Dispute touching payment on several counts arose between the parties.
Correspondence was being exchanged and negotiations were being held to settle the dispute when on the 3rd January, 1972, control, administration and management of the Batala Engineering Company Limited was taken over by the Government under the provisions of the Economic Reforms Order, (1972 P.0.1 of 1972). To manage the company the government appointed its own officers in place of the directors. Correspondence took place between the parties for settlement of accounts and disputes. It appears that due to lack of adequate information the newly appointed officers to manage the company could not properly handle the issue. Ultimately a senior executive of the respondent, Mr. Maimone, came all the way from Italy, held meetings and discussions with the officers of the appellant and sorted out the matters to some extent. However, no final solution of the dispute could be evolved. The respondent had, therefore, to institute suit on the 18th October, 1980, to recover what is considered to be due to it from the appellant. The break-up of its claim is as follows, (1)Technical services US $ 34,558.10 (2)For acceleration of work US$ 05,882.31 (3)Refund of guarantee deposit US $ 6,301.20 (4)Balance of first 20% payment US $ 914.88 (5)Interest US$ 215,410.93 (6)Future interest US $ 374,976.47 (7)Damages on account of fire to be determined
2. Strange to say the appellant denied the existence of the agreement alleged by the respondent. It also denied its liability to pay anything to the respondent. However, when the correspondence, especially the letters sent by the appellant as well as by its predecessor, the Batala Engineering Company Limited, were placed on the record it became clear from the very admissions of the appellant that quite a substantial amount was payable by the appellant to the respondent. The learned trial Court accepted the respondent's claim in toto and decreed the suit.
3. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties we have gone through the entire record especially through the appellant's specific admissions of the amount payable to the respondent. The learned counsel for the respondent has contended before us that he would restrict the respondent's claim to what is admitted by the appellant in its own letters especially Exhs P.24, P.25, P.26 and P.27. The respondent's claim to the extent indicated below is admitted by the appellant in unequivocal words in these documents, (1)Technical services US$ 30, 561.80Rs.1,45,532.25 (2)For acceleration of work Rs.5,04,200.00 (3)Damage on account of fire Rs.56,733.95 (4)Refund of security US$ 6,301.20 Rs.30,005.68 (5)Balance of 20% payment US 914.88Rs.4,356.57 TotalRs.7.40.828.45 The respondent's claim in appeal in U.S. Dollars has been converted into Pakistan rupees as per exchange rate prevalent at the time when the amount became due and was payable to the respondent, that is to say, at the rate of one U.S. Dollar equal to Pakistan Rs.4.7190.
4. Barring interest nothing more than the aforesaid amount of Rs.7,40,828.45 has now been claimed by the learned counsel for the respondent. Consequently the appeal is partially accepted and the learned trial Court's decree is modified to the extent that the respondent will recover Rs.7,40,828.45 instead of Rs.37,49,764.00 and that the appellant will pay interest at the rate of six per cent per annum from the date of institution of the suit till the recovery of the decretal amount instead of at the rate of twelve per cent awarded by the learned trial Court. The respondent will get the costs of the suit as well as of appeal from the appellant.
H.B.T./P-75/L revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.