Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XXXVII,R.2

Law: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Section: 118

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.XXXVII, R.2---Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881), S.118---Summary suit on the basis of promissory note---Negotiable instrument---Condition---Effect---Document---Proof of---When any condition had been attached with a promissory note then it would bring the same out of the ambit of negotiable instrument---Interest having been included in the promissory note, therefore same was not a negotiable instrument---Presumption was attached to a negotiable instrument but the same was rebuttable---Plaintiff was bound to prove the execution of document in accordance with law---Plaintiff had failed to prove the receipt of money by the defendant---No decree should have been passed in favour of plaintiff, in circumstances---Impugned and decree passed by the Trial Court were set aside and suit was dismissed---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances. Muhammad Sattar and others v. Tariq Javaid and others 2017 SCMR 98; Muhammad Anwar v. Muhammad Aslam and others 2012 SCMR 345; Nadeem Kamran and another v. Waseem Akhtar Tareen 2011 CLD 533 and Chiragh (dead) through LRs v. Ibrahim and others 2010 SCMR 1976 ref. Liaqat Ali Khan v. Mst. Shafaq Urooj 2017 CLD 35; Shehzad Akhtar v. Muhammad Saleem Shad Qureshi and another 2018 CLD 28; Rasheed ur Rehman Khan v. Mian Iqbal Hussain PLD 2006 SC 418; Pandit Sushil Chander Chaturvedi v. Wali Ullah and others AIR 1941 Allahabad 158 and Sarju Sahu and others v. Sukhi Lal and others AIR 1924 Patna 96 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, J.---- Through this single judgment I intend to decide the above captioned R.F.A. as well as R.F.A. No.121 of 2013 as both the appeals have arisen against the same judgment and decree. 2. The facts are that the plaintiff/respondent No.1 filed a suit for recovery of Rs.12,00,000/- under Order XXXVII of the C.P.C. on 24.08.2005 against the appellants as well as respondent No.2 on the basis of a joint promisory note and receipt as well as mortgage deed dated 30.03.2004 with 1% mark up till realization of loan amount. After service the appellants/defendants Nos.1 and 2 filed an application for leave to defend and contested the suit. Initially the suit was…

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