Law:

Section:

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---.--- ---.----S. 10---.---Leave to defend, grant of---.---Setting up a new case by plaintiff---.--- Effect---.--- If plaintiff Bank sets up a new case through documents attached with plaint, then defendants are entitled for grant of leave to defend---.---If the additional documents are nothing but further clarifying the claim made in plaint, then leave cannot be granted. Sat Narian v. Pheroze Behramji and others AIR 1936 Lah. 35 and Syed Mohsin Raza Bukhari and 4 others v. Syed Azra Zenab Bukhari 1993 CLC 31 rel. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---.--- ---.----Ss. 9 & 10---.---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S. 17---.---Suit for recovery of finance---.--- General power of attorney---.--- Registered document---.---Board resolution, non-filing of---.---Defendants resisted suit on grounds that it was not filed by a person duly authorized as no Board resolution was produced---.---Validity---.---Suit was filed by duly authorized attorney whose registered power of attorney was attached with plaint---.---Registered document was per se admissible in evidence, therefore, there was no requirement of filing Board resolution or any other document along with such power of attorney---.---Requirement of S. 9(1) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 was of authorized person only and Power of Attorney of authorized person was available on Court file and same was sufficient to fulfil requirement of S. 9(1) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---.---No defense was set up with reference to amount claimed by plaintiff Bank, consequently, application for leave to defend suit was dismissed---.---Plaintiff Bank had proved disbursement of finance facilities as well as its availing by defendant---.---Finance agreement expired on 30.06.2008 and plaintiff Bank could not claim markup after said period to which it was not entitled---.---High Court declined markup after expiry of finance facility agreement---.---Suit was decreed accordingly. Soneri Bank Limited v. Classic Denim Mills (Pvt.) Limited and 3 others 2011…