| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 1329 2012 SLD 1329 2012 CLD 1858 |
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No. D-1780 of 2009, decision dated: 5-05-2011
GULZAR AHMED, JUSTICE SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA, JUSTICE
Sami Ahsan for Petitioners. Ms. Naheed A. Shahid for
Respondents Nos.1 to 4.
Constitutional Petition No. D-1780 of 2009, decision dated: 5-05-2011
GULZAR AHMED, JUSTICE SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA, JUSTICE
Sami Ahsan for Petitioners. Ms. Naheed A. Shahid for
Respondents Nos.1 to 4.
MESSRS SAJID BROTHERS & CO. THROUGH PROPRIETOR AND 2 OTHERS
VS
MANAGER, ALLIED BANK LIMITED AND 8 OTHERS
Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)
Section: 22
Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---S. 22--- Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition--- Maintainability--- Appeal---Petitioner assailed order of Banking Court whereby names of respondents in a suit were struck off from the list of defendants---Maintainability---Section 22 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 provided an aggrieved person remedy of appeal against a , decree, sentence or final order passed by the Banking Court but did not provide appeal, review, revision against an order accepting or rejecting the application for leave to defend or any interlocutory order of the Banking Court, which did not dispose of the entire case before the Banking Court---Banking Court, in the present case, had decided the application for leave to defend the suit and in doing so had struck off the names of said respondents from the list of defendants---Appeal against such order was expressly barred by law and therefore, there was no warrant for entertaining a constitutional petition and doing so would circumvent and frustrate the law---Constitutional petition being not maintainable, was dismissed. ORDER GULZAR AHMED, J.---We have heard learned counsel for the parties. This petition has been filed against the order dated 27-5-2009 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court acting under the banking jurisdiction by which while deciding application for leave to defend the suit of respondents Nos.5 and 6 it has struck off the name of such respondents from the list of the defendants. Learned counsel for the petitioners was asked to show as to how this petition is maintainable. Counsel for the petitioners has simply relied upon subsection (6) of section 22 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 and admitted that the case of petitioners does not come within exception as provided in section 15(11) and section 19(7) of the Ordinance. Section 22 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance 2001 is as follows:-- 22. Appeal.---(1) Subject to subsection (2), any person aggrieved by any judgment, decree, sentence, or final order passed by a Banking…
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