| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 1637 2023 CLD 372 2023 SLD 1637 |
Lahore High Court
R.F.A. No. 44 of 2020/BWP, heard on 13th June, 2022.Date of hearing: 13th June, 2022.
Before Jawad Hassan and Sultan Tanvir Ahmad, JJ
M. Basit Babar Chughtai for Appellants. Ali Raza Kabeer for
Respondent-Silk Bank. Rana Rizwan Mehmood for
Respondents Nos. 3 and 3(a).
R.F.A. No. 44 of 2020/BWP, heard on 13th June, 2022.Date of hearing: 13th June, 2022.
Before Jawad Hassan and Sultan Tanvir Ahmad, JJ
M. Basit Babar Chughtai for Appellants. Ali Raza Kabeer for
Respondent-Silk Bank. Rana Rizwan Mehmood for
Respondents Nos. 3 and 3(a).
Messrs AL-BARKAT SEED CORPORATION and 3 others---Appellants
VERSUS
SILK BANK LIMITED and others---Respondents
Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001
Section: 10(9)(10(11)(12)22
Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss. 10(9)(10)(11)(12) 22---Suit for recovery of Bank loan---Leave to defend the suit, dismissal of---Word forthwith---Effect---Framing of issues and recording of evidence---Application for leave to defend the suit filed by appellant/defendant was dismissed and Banking Court did not passing and decree, instead issues were framed, evidence was recorded and then suit was decreed---Validity---Upon rejection of leave application Banking Court was to forthwith pass and decree under S. 10(12) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Word forthwith was preceded by shall that had not left any discretion with Banking Court but to pass and decree on the material that was available on record---If sufficient material was available on record and suit of respondent/plaintiff/Bank was in accord with S. 9 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, then there was no need to proceed further for recording of evidence---If Banking Court on consideration of plaint, leave application and reply thereto was of the view that some substantial question of law and/or fact was raised and it required evidence, then procedure of law as envisaged in Ss. 10(9), (10) (11) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 was to be followed---High Court set aside and decree and remanded the matter to Banking Court for decision afresh on application for leave to defend the suit filed by appellant / defendant--- Appeal was allowed accordingly. Zakaria Ghani and 4 others v. Muhammad Ikhlaq Memon and 8 others PLD 2016 SC 229 and Faysal Bank Limited v. Sajjad Aslam and others 2022 CLD 123 ref. Mrs. Jawahar Afzal v. Messrs United Bank Limited 2003 CLD 119; Messrs United Bank Limited through Authorized Attorney v. Banking Court No. II and 2 others 2012 CLD 1556; Khurram Farooq v. Bank Al-Falah Limited and another 2018 CLD 1417 and Apollo Textile Mills Ltd. and others v. Soneri Bank Ltd. 2012 CLD 337 rel. Date of hearing: 13th June, 2022. JUDGMENT SULTAN TANVIR AHMAD, J.---The present Appeal, under section 22 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances)…
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