Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 2097 2013 SLD 2097 2013 CLD 546
Lahore High Court
F.A.O. No.156 of 2010, decision dated: 7-11-2012.
MUHAMMAD KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN AND MUHAMMAD FARRUKH IRFAN KHAN, JJ
Sardar Riaz Karim and Shahid Mumtaz Piracha for Appellants. Raja Naveed Azam for
Respondents.

Rao MUHAMMAD SADAQAT ALI and another

VS

Messrs RANA JAMAL AKBAR ICE FACTORY RAJAN PUR and another

Law:

Section:

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss. 15, 19 & 22---Auction of mortgaged property by Bank under S.15 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Objection petition by -debtor alleging such auction to be fraudulent and without notice to him---Banking Court accepted such objection petition and set aside the auction---Pleas of auction purchaser were that objection petition was time-barred; that Banking Court had set aside auction after four years without considering huge amount incurred by him on renovation and construction of suit property---Validity---Decision of Full Bench of Lahore High Court in Muhammad Umar Rathore v. Federation of Pakistan 2009 CLD 257 which had declared S.15 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 as ultra vires to Constitution on 23-12-2008, would not apply to suit property auctioned on 8-11-2006---Bank had not proved publicizing of proposed auction in two daily newspapers as required by S.15(4) of the Ordinance---Bank had not submitted accounts of auction to Banking Court within thirty days---Auction report showed that Bank had conducted auction at its office and sent its report to its Head Office, but approval was not available on record---Bank had sold suit property at less than the reserve price---Bank had not informed Banking Court or local authorities while handing over possession of suit property to auction purchaser, without preparing its inventory---Bank along with auction report had not placed on record list of bidders that participated in the auction and other proceedings conducted at the spot---Collusion between Bank and auction purchaser was apparent on face of record---Auction purchaser had not provided any details for alleged amount incurred by him---High Court modified impugned order by directing debtor to pay 20% instead of 5% to auction purchaser on price of auction and also directed Banking Court to appoint local commission for preparing quantum of machinery added and ascertaining its price and expenses incurred by auction purchaser. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, J.---The appellants filed objection petition under…
🔒
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