Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 889 2020 SLD 889 2020 CLD 419
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 1599 of 2015, decided on 14th June, 2019, Date of hearing: 23rd May, 2019.
YOUSUF ALI SAYEED, JUSTICE
Mohsin Shahwani for Plaintiff. Muhammad Qayyum Abbasi for Defendant No. 2. Hassan Akbar and Muhammad Imtiaz Khan for Defendant No.4.

LT. COL. (RETD.) SHAHID HAMID THROUGH DULY CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY

VS

STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN AND 4 OTHERS

Law: Banking Companies Ordinance, 1962

Section: 82A(3),82-B(5),82-E(7)

Banking Companies Ordinance (LVII of 1962)--- ----Ss. 82-A(3), 82-B(5) 82-E(7)---Federal Ombudsmen Institutional Reforms Act (XIV of 2013), S. 18---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Arts. 36, 48 60---Suit for declaration, injunction and damages---Unauthorized withdrawal from Bank account---Plaintiff asserted that amount from his account was fraudulently withdrawn---Complaint before Wafaqi Mohtasib was dismissed and thereafter plaintiff preferred civil suit---Validity---Grievance of plaintiff against Bank in relation to transaction was a matter that fell squarely within jurisdiction of Mohtasib---Such jurisdiction according to Ss. 82-A(3) 82-B(5) of Banking Companies Ordinance, 1962 included enquiring into complaints of banking malpractices, as well as violation of banking laws, rules, regulations or guidelines---Such enactments applied to all banks operating in Pakistan, also extended to entertaining complaints of fraudulent or unauthorized withdrawals or debit entries in accounts---Plaintiff invoked jurisdiction of Mohtasib of his own accord---Proceedings as ensued were not tainted with mala fide on part of adjudicating authority or suffered from any violation of principles of natural justice---Plaintiff did not seek to avail a direct remedy in the form of a suit as an alternative to engaging mechanism of statutory fora but had already availed remedy before Mohtasib and preferred appeal against his decision---Plaintiff sought High Court to exercise jurisdiction so as to sit in appeal over concurrent findings of original and appellate forums albeit that their decisions were competently made in relation to a subject that fell within scope of their jurisdiction and did not offend principles of justice--- Substance of objection that findings recorded were erroneous allegedly being opposed to law and facts could not be countenanced--- High Court declined to interfere in concurrent findings of forums below as suit was clearly barred by limitation in terms of Arts. 36, 48 or 60 of Limitation Act, 1908---Suit was dismissed in circumstances. ORDER YOUSUF ALI SAYEED, J.---The genesis of the Suit can be traced to 30.10.2009, being the date on which a sum of Rs. 35 Million…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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