| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 317 2024 SLD 317 2024 CLD 518 |
Lahore High Court
R.F.A. No. 30994 of 2022, decision dated: 11th November, 2023. Date of hearing: 25th October, 2023.
Before Muhammad Sajid Mehmood Sethi and Asim Hafeez, JJ
Shahid Ikram Siddiqui, Barrister Sajid Ikram Siddiqui, Aakif Majeed, Asim Tufail Farooqi and Sajid Hussain Qureshi for Appellants. Ambreen Moin and Zain-ul-Abideen for
Respondent.
R.F.A. No. 30994 of 2022, decision dated: 11th November, 2023. Date of hearing: 25th October, 2023.
Before Muhammad Sajid Mehmood Sethi and Asim Hafeez, JJ
Shahid Ikram Siddiqui, Barrister Sajid Ikram Siddiqui, Aakif Majeed, Asim Tufail Farooqi and Sajid Hussain Qureshi for Appellants. Ambreen Moin and Zain-ul-Abideen for
Respondent.
MUHAMMAD JAVED SHAFI and others---Appellants
VS
NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN through Branch Manager---Respondent
Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001
Section: 9,10,22
Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss. 9, 10 & 22---Suit for recovery of finance---Finance facility, non-availing of---Proof---Suit filed by respondent/financial institution was decreed against appellants/customers---Validity---Bald denial of execution of finance and security documents was not convincing when numerous documents were otherwise available on record to substantiate the claim---Board Resolution for seeking renewal of CF-Facility, loan application, acceptance of terms of facility offer letter, execution of documents, finance and security, registration of charge with SECP were sufficient to dismiss applications for grant of leave to defend---Mere institution of suit by appellants/customer, seeking various declarations and grant of unconditional leave to defend to respondent/financial institution did not entitle appellants/customers for grant of leave to defend in suit by respondent/financial institution, as rule of the thumb---High Court maintained judgment and decree passed against appellants/customers, as no illegality was found to justify interference in exercise of appellate jurisdiction---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. PICIC Commercial Bank Limited v. Spectrum Fisheries Limited 2006 CLD 440; Messrs Muzamil Brothers and another v. Saudi Pak Commercial Bank Limited through Manager 2006 CLD 1546; Jamal Tube (Pvt.) Ltd, Lahore through Chief Executive Officer and others v. First Punjab Modarba, Lahore 2021 CLD 1372; Decent Builders and Developers v. Standard Chartered Bank (Pakistan) Limited 2021 CLD 130; Obaid Associates through Proprietor and another v. United Bank Limited 2021 CLD 1019; Messrs First Dawood Investment Bank Limited through Authorized Officers/Attorneys v. Mrs. Anjum Saleem and 3 others 2016 CLD 920; Pak Oman Investment Company Limited v. Chenab Limited and 9 others 2016 CLD 1903; The Bank of Punjab v. Arif Ali Shah Bukhari 2016 CLD 1301; Bank of Punjab v. International Ceramics Ltd. and others 2013 CLD 1472; Soneri Bank Limited v. Classic Denim Mills (Pvt.) Limited and 3 others 2011 CLD 408; Nusrat Textile Mills Ltd and 8 others v. United Bank Ltd. through Attorney 2005 CLD 1421;…
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