| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1917 2017 SLD 1917 2017 CLD 873 |
Lahore High Court
R.F.A. No. 30 of 2013/BWP, heard on 12-01-2017
MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETHI, JUSTICE, TARIQ IFTIKHAR AHMAD, JUSTICE
Aejaz Ahmed Ansari and Muhammad Asif Usman Qureshi for Appellants. Muhammad Saleem Iqbal for
Respondent.
R.F.A. No. 30 of 2013/BWP, heard on 12-01-2017
MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETHI, JUSTICE, TARIQ IFTIKHAR AHMAD, JUSTICE
Aejaz Ahmed Ansari and Muhammad Asif Usman Qureshi for Appellants. Muhammad Saleem Iqbal for
Respondent.
KHAWAJA RAHIM ULLAH & OTHERS
VS
BANK OF PUNJAB
Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)
Section: 9,10,10(3),10(4),10(5),22
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss. 9, 10 & 22---Suit for recovery of finance---Application for leave to defend the suit---Requirements---Non-raising of substantial questions---Effect---Defendants were aggrieved of and decree passed by Banking Court---Validity---Defendants, in terms of S. 10(4) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, were required to disclose in their application for leave to defend the suit, the amount of finance availed, repaid to plaintiff Bank along with dates of payments, other amounts payable to financial institution up to the date of institution of suit and amount, if any, disputed by them as payable to financial institution and facts in support thereof, instead of evasively denying availing facility without any solid basis and proof---Defendants were required under S. 10(5) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, to file all such documents along with their application to defend the suit, which in their opinion supported purported questions of law or facts---Defendants failed to comply with the provisions of S. 10(3) (4) & (5) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 and approached the High Court with unclean hands and their defence was not bona fide---Defendants were not entitled to leave to defend and their application was rightly rejected by Banking Court---Plaintiff Bank had disclosed details of amounts of finance facility availed, paid and payable by defendants---Findings rendered by Banking Court were also unexceptionable and based on correct appreciation of available evidence/record and application of relevant law---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Messrs Asia Motor Company through Proprietor and another v. Messrs NIB Bank Limited 2016 CLD 609 and Sheikh Murshid Ali and others v. United Bank Limited 2016 CLD 1471 distinguished. Ghulam Rasool through L.Rs. and others v. Muhammad Hussain and others PLD 2011 SC 119; Apollo Textile Mills Ltd. and others v. Soneri Bank Ltd. 2012 CLD 337; Allied Bank of Pakistan Limited I.I. Chundrigar Road Karachi v. Messrs Kohinoor Cotton Mills Limited, Lahore and…
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