Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001

Section: 9

Law: Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Section: 58(1)

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---   ----S. 9---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S. 58(f)---Suit for recovery of bank loan---Mortgage of property---Appellants were guarantors and assailed and decree passed by Banking Court on the plea that no guarantees were executed by them, as the same were not available on Court record--- Validity--- Contention of appellants was contrary to record, where personal guarantees were available---Once given the guarantees, it was not open for appellants to wriggle out of it on a bald assertion that there was no guarantee available on record---Appellants failed to point out any illegality in passed by Banking Court---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.    Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan through Chief Manager v. Shaf Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. and another 2006 CLD 743; Habib ur Rehman and another v. Judge Banking Court No.4, Lahore and another 2006 CLD 217 and Messrs Taxila Cotton Mills Ltd. and 10 others v. Allied Bank of Pakistan Ltd. and 4 others 2005 CLD 244 ref.    Ghazala Arif v. Union Bank Ltd. (now Emirates Bank International), Lahore 2000 CLC 1201 rel.   JUDGMENT ABID AZIZ SHEIKH, J.---This appeal has been filed, by appellants Nos.1 to 6. Appellant No.1, in plaint, was impleaded as defendant No.5 and appellants Nos.2 to 6, were the legal heirs of defendant No.4. This appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 14-4-2008 passed by learned JudgeBankingCourt No. 1Multanthroughwhichthe suitoftherespondentbankwasdecreedagainstallthe defendants including the appellant No.1 and predecessor of appellants Nos.2 to 6 (hereinafter referred to as appellants) for an amount of Rs.23,19,410.91 with cost of suit and cost of funds. 2.Facts in brief are that respondent bank filed a suit for recovery of Rs.23,21,639.91 along with cost of funds and other costs against the appellants and other defendants therein. Defendant No.1 in the suit was sued being a principle debtor whereas the other defendants including appellantsweresuedbeingguarantors.Theappellants werealsosuedbeingthemortgageroftheproperty whichwasmortgagedwiththebanktosecurethe finance of the…

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