| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 2302 2002 SLD 2302 2002 CLD 1776 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.23190 of 1998, decision dated: 18-06-2002.
CH. IJAZ AHMAD AND SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, JJ
Azmat Saeed for Petitioners Ahmed Shuja Baba for
Respondents.
Writ Petition No.23190 of 1998, decision dated: 18-06-2002.
CH. IJAZ AHMAD AND SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, JJ
Azmat Saeed for Petitioners Ahmed Shuja Baba for
Respondents.
Messrs TRADE LINES through Managing Partner and others ers
VS
. BANK OF PUNJAB through General Manager and another --Respondents
Law:
Section:
(a) Banking Tribunals Ordinance (LVIII of 1984) -- Ss.6; 9 & 10 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss.12(2), 151 & O.XXVII A, R.1 -Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199 & Fourth Shed., Entry No. 28 Constitutional petition Concealment of facts by petitioner Effect Suit for recovery of Bank dues Banking Tribunal decreed the suit after finding reply to show cause notice to be time barred ¬Defendants filed three applications i.e. under S.6(5) of the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 and S.12(2) and O.XXVII A, R.1, C.P.C. Banking Tribunal dismissed all applications Contention of defendants was that Banking Tribunal established by Federal Government had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the suit filed by Bank, a Provincial Corporation Validity High Court had decided such question of law vide dated 11 7 1996 passed in the case of M/s. Chenab Cement Products (Pvt.) Ltd. and others. v. Banking Tribunal, Lahore and others (PLD 1996 Lah.672), whereby s and decrees of Banking Tribunal passed prior thereto had been saved on the basis of well known principle of past and closed transaction ¬Present decree was passed on 23 5 1995 i.e. prior to said decision of High Court Defendants had alternative remedy to file appeal under S.9 of the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 which had not been filed Defendants by not attaching copy of reply to show cause notice with Constitutional petition had concealed material facts from High Court regarding raising or non raising the point of jurisdiction in such reply Defendants had not approached the Court with clean hands High Court declined to exercise discretion in favour of defendants Defendants had made such applications in order to frustrate the decree granted to Bank, which otherwise had attained finality High Court dismissed the Constitutional petition as having no merits. Imran v. Presiding Officer, Punjab Special Court No.VI, Multan and 2 others PLD 1996 Lah. 542; Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad and others v. Aftab Ahmad Khan Sherpao and others PLD 1992 SC 723; Federal Public Service Commission and others v. Syed Muhammad Afaq and others PLD 2002…
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