Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 2163 2013 SLD 2163 2013 CLD 2107
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No.D-4559 of 2012, heard on 17-05-2013.
MUSHIR ALAM, C.J. AND NADEEM AKHTAR, J
Naleymitho alias Muhammad Ishaque for Petitioner. Ms. Tania Alam for
Respondent No. 1. Jamsheed Ghaswala for
Respondent No. 2 called absent.

BASHIR AHMED

VS

ALLIED BANK LIMITED and 2 others

Law:

Section:

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss. 9, 19 & 15---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Suit for recovery of loan amount---Execution of decree by the Banking Court---Sale of mortgaged property---Objection petition---Bank filed suit for recovery of loan amount against the mortgagor who did not file application for leave to defend nor did he appear and suit was decreed ex parte---Execution petition was filed and mortgaged property was ordered to be attached---Petitioner filed objection petition for protection of his possession being tenant of mortgaged property which was dismissed by the executing court---Validity---Section 15 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, applied to cases where notices were issued by the financial institution to the mortgagor demanding payment of the outstanding mortgage money and such notices could be issued even without approaching the Banking Court---No notices were issued by the Bank and suit for recovery was filed before the Banking Court which resulted into passing of the decree---Upon pronouncement of and decree, S.19 of the Ordinance would come into play, which provided the mechanism for execution of the decree and sale of the mortgaged property with or without intervention of the Banking Court---Applicability of subsection (3) of S.15 of the Ordinance had been specifically excluded in the sale of mortgaged, pledged or hypothecated property by a financial institution in exercise of its power conferred by S.19(3) of the Ordinance---Burden was on the petitioner to prove the assertion that lease in his favour was bona fide and the question as to whether the lease was bona fide or not, could be proved only through evidence and not otherwise---Question as to the presumption of the lease to be not bona fide, was to be left at the discretion of the Banking Court, and such question was to be decided and such discretion was to be exercised by the Banking Court according to the facts and circumstances of each case---Lease was created in favour of the petitioner during the subsistence of the mortgage in favour of Bank---Consent of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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