Law:

Section:

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss.7, 17 & 3---Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss.132 & 135---Suit for recovery of loan---Contract of guarantee---Responsibility of guarantor---Scope---Contract of guarantee, in the present case, showed that defendants had signed and guaranteed the loan agreement not being the guarantors only but as a principal debtor---Liability to pay said defendants shall not stand discharged merely by resorting to S.133, Contract Act, 1872---Liability of defendants, besides being guarantor, was also in their capacity as principal debtor---Subsequent agreements would not absolve the defendants of their liability because defendants had bound themselves by virtue of the contract of guarantee that their liability shall remain unaffacted even in the event of modification, variation of the terms of facility, compositions or other arrangements' with the customer of the Bank---Contract of guarantee was itself an independent agreement, the terms whereof had bound the parties in isolation with main agreement---Provisions of Ss.133 & 135 Contract Act, 1872, visualized consent -or assent of the guarantors at the time of variance only and the same could not be waived by the guarantors in advance. Mian Aftab A Sheikh v. Trust Leasing Corporation Ltd. 2003 CLD 702 fol. JUDGMENT SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, J.-Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that respondent No.2, is a Private Company (limited by shares) while respondents Nos.3 to 9 are its Directors, including the appellants. Respondent No.2 approached respondent No.1 for financial assistance, which request was acceded to, resultantly a sum of Rs.45,00,000 under Modaraba agreement dated -21-6-1995 and Rs.820,000 under Modaraba agreement dated 12-7-1995, was disbursed to respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 filed a suit for recovery of Rs.73,67,971 with liquidated damages, in the Banking Tribunal on 28-4-1999, which was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 17-6-2002, against all the defendants. The appellants who were statedly guarantors of the loan, were impleaded as defendants Nos.4 and 6 in the array of defendants, who have now challenged the impugned…

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