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

Section: 19,22

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 166

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 12(2),89

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss. 19 22--- Limitation Act (IX of 1908), First Sched. Art. 166--- Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12(2) O. XXI, R. 89---Execution of decree---Sale, assailing of---Limitation---Deposit of auction money---Effect---Appellant/ debtor was aggrieved of dismissal of his application under O. XXI, R. 89, C.P.C. and auction of mortgaged house was maintained by Banking Court--- Earlier appeal against dismissal of application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. filed by appellant/ debtor for getting and decree set aside was withdrawn by him---Validity---Appellant/ debtor filed application under the provisions of O. XXI, R. 89, C.P.C.---Appellant/ debtor was afforded opportunity and means under O. XXI, R. 89, C.P.C. for setting aside sale after it was validly carried out by making payment of amount specified in proclamation of sale minus any amount received by decree holder since date of proclamation of sale along with a further sum of 5% of purchase money for payment to auction purchaser---In order to avail such opportunity, appellant/ debtor was required under Art. 166 of Limitation Act, 1908 to file application as well as make deposit within a period of 30 days from the date of sale---As soon as appellant/ debtor withdrew his appeal, Banking Courts order dismissing application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. had attained finality---Such dismissal order could not be attacked and interfered with or made ineffective subsequently, by direct or indirect means, in a collateral proceeding---Having deposited entire bid money within the time stipulated by law, and in addition, upon confirmation of sale by Banking Court, auction purchaser had acquired valuable rights in subject property---Such rights of auction purchaser, lawfully conferred by the Court, had to be protected and could not be taken away---High Court declined to interfere in the order passed by Banking Court---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Muhammad Khalil v. Faisal M.B. Corporation 2019 SCMR 321; Anwar Ahmed Ansari v. Pak Libya Holding Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. and another First Appeal No.219 of 2017; Asma Zafarul Hasan v. United Bank Ltd. 1981 SCMR 108;…

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