| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2987 2017 SLD 2987 2017 CLD 1726 |
Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan
W.P. No. 4514 of 2013, decided on 22nd March, 2017.
SHAMS MEHMOOD MIRZA, J
Nafees Ahmad Ansari for Petitioner. Muhammad Saleem Iqbal for
Respondent.
W.P. No. 4514 of 2013, decided on 22nd March, 2017.
SHAMS MEHMOOD MIRZA, J
Nafees Ahmad Ansari for Petitioner. Muhammad Saleem Iqbal for
Respondent.
MUZAMMIL OIL AND SOAP INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD.
VS
NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN and others
Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001
Section: 10,9
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss. 10 9---Suit for recovery---Application for leave to defend---Application for defendant, filed during pendency of defendant’s application for leave to defend, seeking a direction to the effect that plaintiff Bank reschedule/renew finance facility, was rejected by Banking Court---Validity---During pendency of leave to defend application, defendant was precluded from filing any miscellaneous application and Banking Court, under the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, had no jurisdiction to direct financial institution to reschedule dues of its customers---Petitioner’s application was not maintainable and was rightly declined by the Banking Court--- Constitutional petition was dismissed, accordingly. (b) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 199--- Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Constitutional petition against an interim order passed by a court acting under a special law, which did not provide a right of appeal, was not maintainable. ORDER SHAMS MEHMOOD MIRZA, J.---This writ petition seeks to challenge order dated 14.03.2013 passed by the banking court whereby the application filed by the petitioner was dismissed. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the respondent bank filed a suit against the petitioner and the proforma respondents. During the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioner made an application seeking a direction to the respondent bank to reschedule/renew the finance facility in the light of order dated 14.12.2010 passed in writ petition No. 13351 of 2010. The said application was dismissed hence this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner prior to the filing of the suit had filed Writ Petition No.13351 of 2010 seeking rescheduling of dues on the terms granted to certain other customers of the respondent bank. The said writ petition was disposed of on 14.12.2010 with a direction to the petitioner to file an application with the respondent bank and also directed the respondent bank to pass an order on the same. It…
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