| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 218 2015 SLD 218 2015 CLD 33 |
Sindh High Court
Suit Nos. B-06 of 2008 and 80 of 2002, decision dated: 9-08-2014
NADEEM AKHTAR, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Suit Nos. B-06 of 2008 and 80 of 2002, decision dated: 9-08-2014
NADEEM AKHTAR, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
TRANSMISSION ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LIMITED through Duly Authorised Director--Plaintiff
VS
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN through Managing Director--Defendant
Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)
Section: 9,22
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O.IX,R.9,O.XVII,R.3
Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss.9 & 22---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.IX, R.9 & O.XVII, R.3---Suit for rendition of account, recovery of money and damages--- Dismissal for non-prosecution--- Failure to produce evidence---Plaintiff sought restoration of his suit which was dismissed for non-prosecution---Validity---Time was granted to plaintiff at least on two occasions at his request to produce evidence but plaintiff failed to produce evidence and comply with orders passed in such behalf by Court---Consequences for failure on part of plaintiff in producing its evidence, causing attendance of its witnesses, performing any other act necessary to further progress of suit, for which time was allowed by court, as specifically enumerated in O. XVII, R. 3, C.P.C. were fully attracted at the time when his suit was dismissed for non-prosecution---Such order of dismissal of suit was under O. XVII, R. 3, C.P.C., which was to be deemed to be on merits and adjudication in which rights of parties with regard to controversy in suit were conclusively determined by court---Order of dismissal of suit was a on merits and only remedy for plaintiff was to file appeal against that under S.22 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, which specifically provided that any person aggrieved by any , decree, sentence or final order passed by Banking Court might prefer appeal to High Court---Application filed by plaintiff for restoration of suit was barred under S.22 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, and not maintainable---High Court declined to restore suit of plaintiff which was dismissed for non-prosecution---Application was dismissed in circumstances. Messrs Makran Fisheries (Pvt.) Limited v. Platinum Co. 2006 CLD 52; Shaikh Kamran Maqbool v. Bolan Bank Limited through Manager and another 2006 CLD 163 and Shahid Hussain v. Lahore Municipal Corporation PLD 1981 SC 474 rel. Zulfiqar Ali v. Lal Din and another 1974 SCMR 162; Muhammad Yousuf v. Shamsuddin 1980 SCMR 519; Kh. Ghulam Qadir and another v. Muhammad Sharif and 11 others 2000 MLD 2047; Haji Ahmad Hassan v. Dr.…
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