| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 1956 2011 SLD 1956 2011 CLD 1018 |
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No. D-2389 and Miscellaneous No.11961 of 2009, decision dated: 10-05-2011.
MUSHIR ALAM, C.J. AND SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI, J
Badar Alam for the Petitioners. Hassan Akber for the
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Muhammad Ali Hakro for
Respondent No. 4.
Constitutional Petition No. D-2389 and Miscellaneous No.11961 of 2009, decision dated: 10-05-2011.
MUSHIR ALAM, C.J. AND SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI, J
Badar Alam for the Petitioners. Hassan Akber for the
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Muhammad Ali Hakro for
Respondent No. 4.
Mst. SAFIA BEGUM through Attorney and 2 others
VS
STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN through Governor and 3 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss. 3, 17 & 22---Companies Ordinance, (XLVII of 1984), S. 290--- Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Order of High Court dated 18-4-2001 passed in liquidation proceedings to wind up plaintiff Bank for being unable to pay its debts---Subsequent suits filed by plaintiff--Bank in year 2000 for recovery of finance availed by petitioners/mortgagors--Non-filing of appeal against decrees dated 2-12-2002 and 13-2-2008 passed against petitioners by Banking Court---Statement filed before Liquidator by plaintiff Bank showing its cost of funds fixed by State Bank of Pakistan w.e.f. 31-8-2001 on basis of annual financial statement for year 2007---Petitioners plea that State Bank had acted illegally and in excess of jurisdiction in fixing such cost of funds of plaintiff having retrospective effect from year 1999 in absence of its annual audited accounts of each year since promulgation of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 on 31-8-2001---Validity---Bank after passing order of its winding up had filed suits against petitioners and consequent thereto two decrees had been passed against them on 2-12-2002 and 28-5-2003---Decree dated 28-5-2003 was later on modified on 13-2-2008 with cosent of parties allowing cost of funds to plaintiff from the date of promulgation of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 till realization of decretal amount---Petitioners despite having an alternative and efficacious remedy under law had not challenged such decrees or orders before competent forum---Allegations levelled against Bank would require recording of evidence, which could not be done in Constitutional jurisdiction---State Bank had not committed any illegality in calculating cost of funds of plaintiff Bank on basis of its last available audited accounts for year 2007 as plaintiff was under liquidation since year 2000---Petitioner had no case on merits---High Court dismissed constitutional petition for being not maintainable in circumstances. Wealth Tax Officer and another v. Shaukat Afzal and 4 others 1993 SCMR 1810 rel. (b)…
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