| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2005 SLG 1786 2005 SLD 1786 2005 CLD 1781 |
Lahore High Court
F.A.O. No.8 of 2005, heard on 4-07-2005.
MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ AND IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, JJ
Muhammad Suleman Bhatti for Appellant. Muhammad Irfan Wain for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Mazhar Imtiaz Lari for
Respondents Nos.3 and 4.
F.A.O. No.8 of 2005, heard on 4-07-2005.
MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ AND IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, JJ
Muhammad Suleman Bhatti for Appellant. Muhammad Irfan Wain for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Mazhar Imtiaz Lari for
Respondents Nos.3 and 4.
ADIEU (PVT.) LIMITED through Directors/ Chief Executives
VS
. PLATINUM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED through President/Chairman/Chief Executive/ Managing Director and 3 others
Law:
Section:
Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss. 9 & 22---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VII, Rr. 10 & 11---Suit for recovery of damages against Bank and insurance company---Return of plaint.---Appellant. had claimed that lie availed various financial facilities from Bank and in that regard he pledged his stock of 'pesticides as primary security which remained under control and possession of the Bank and that said shock was insured with the Company approved by the Bank after making payment of premium amount---Appellant had alleged that said stock was stolen against which F.I.R. was registered, but claim or appellant with regard to stolen stock, was declined by the Insurance Company without any justification---Application of Insurance Company for deletion of its name from array of respondents was dismissed---Bank filed application for rejection of plaint under O. VII, R.11, C.P.C. and Banking Court allowed said application vide impugned order and returned plaint to appellant holding that Banking Court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon matter of damages claimed by appellant---Validity---Loan facility provided by the. Bank, was availed by appellant and Insurance company had nothing to do for recovery of said loan facility---Suit filed by Bank against appellant for committing default in return of said finance facility had already been decreed---Insurance Policy in respect of goods, which were to be imported against L/C opened by the Bank on behalf' of borrower, was not covered by definition of "Borrower" as given in. Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 and an indemnifier was not an indemnifier in the sense in which it had been used in the definition of word "borrower"---Banking Court, had no jurisdiction to entertain claim of appellant as it was not the case of appellant that Bank had committed any default in discharge of finance facility to appellant: or any obligation thereto---Damages having not been claimed by appellant on the basis of default in finance facility provided to him, Banking Court had rightly found that it had no jurisdiction in the matter---In absence of any infirmity or…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492