Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 2115 2013 SLD 2115 2013 CLD 941
Sindh High Court
Ist Appeal No.31 of 2011, decision dated: 19-12-2012.
MUHAMMAD TASNIM AND AZIZ-UR-REHMAN, JJ
Pirbhulal Goklani for
Respondent No. 2.

MUHAMMAD HUSSAINvsINDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN, HYDERABAD and another

Law:

Section:

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------S. 19---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXI, Rr. 54, 66, 67, 68, 89 & O.XXIII, R.1---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Arts. 166 & 181---Execution proceedings---Public auction of mortgaged property---Judgment-debtor's application under O.XXI, R.89, C.P.C. for setting aside auction sale---Auction-purchaser's plea was that such application filed beyond 30 days was time barred by virtue of Art. 166 of Limitation Act, 1908---Non-confirmation of auction sale by Banking Court on account of compromise made between Bank and borrower---Validity---Duty of Executing Court under O.XXI, R.66, C.P.C. was to cause proclamation of intended auction and such proclamation was required to be drawn up after notice to decree holder and debtor stating therein time and place of auction and accurate description of property to be auctioned---Neither debtor had been served with requisite notice in terms of O.XXI, R.66, C.P.C. nor reserve price and venue of auction had been mentioned in sale proclamation---Valuation report had been obtained in violation of direction of Banking Court much after date of auction---Impugned auction had taken place before expiry of 30 days---Auction purchaser had deposited 25% of bid money after conclusion of auction proceedings, but not immediately in compliance of terms and conditions of auction---Impugned auction was collusive, unfair and in violation of mandatory provisions of O.XXI, C.P.C.---Article 181 of Limitation Act, 1908 and not Art. 166 thereof would apply to the present case---Executing Court had neither confirmed nor had accepted auction, thus, no vested right to confirmation of auction had accrued in favour of auction purchaser---In absence of specific provision of law pertaining to compromise of execution, court had inherent powers to pass order on compromise application filed in execution proceedings---High Court dismissed appeal filed by auction purchaser. Hudaybia Textile Mills Ltd. and others v. Allied Bank of Pakistan and others PLD 1987 SC 512; Muhammad Din v. Ellahi Noor and 4 others PLD 1975 Lah. 1393; U.B.L. v. Heryana Asbestos Cement Industries…
🔒
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