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

Section: 22

THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SHAHID KARIM, JUSTICE:---.--- This is an appeal under section 22 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 (Ordinance, 2001) against the judgment and decree dated 06.03.2009 passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court exercising jurisdiction under the Ordinance, 2001. 2. The respondents Nos.2, 3 and 7 have been proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 10.09.2013. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the judgment and decree passed by the learned Single Bench on two grounds. As against Alamgir Elahi, respondent No. 6, who was the defendant No. 6 in the suit, it has been contended that the learned Single Bench went wrong in deleting the name of the said defendant from the array of defendants at the same time when the leave was granted to the said defendant. The learned counsel for the respondent Aalamgir Elahi supports the portion of the judgment regarding the said respondent and states that the learned Single Bench was justified in proceeding to strike out the name of the said respondent/defendant from the array of the defendants and no cavil can be taken to it. 4. Having gone through the judgment of the learned Single Bench, with regard to respondent No. 6, we do not consider that the said portion of the judgment is sustainable. It is true that the learned Single Bench came to the conclusion that substantial question of law and fact had been made out and which entitled respondent No. 6 to have been granted leave to defend. To that extent no exception can be taken to the judgment and decree. However, in the next paragraph the learned Single Bench went do to strike off the name of the respondent No. 6/defendant No. 6 from the list of defendants in terms of Order I, Rule 10, C.P.C. This was clearly not countenanced and if the leave had been granted to the said respondent, it was proper that issues should have been framed and the parties permitted to lead their evidence pro and contra. By making the order of deletion of the name of respondent No. 6/defendant No. 6 from the array of the defendants, the right of the appellant/decree holder bank to assert otherwise and to make out a case that 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