Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 170 2011 SLD 170 2011 CLD 1517
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 1733 of 2002, decision dated: 2-06-2011
TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI, JUSTICE TARIQ PARVEZ, JUSTICE AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JUSTICE
Amir Alam Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Gul Zarin Kyanai, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 4. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 5 to 6. Sajid Mehmood Sh., Advocate Supreme Court and Altaf Elahi Sheikh, Advocate Supre

MST. NADIA MALIK

VS

MESSRS MAKKI CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND OTHERS

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

Section: 19

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--S. 19(2)---Execution of decree, modes for---Scope---Word "or" used twice in S. 19(2) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 would be read disjunctively classifying three different modes for execution of decree---­Banking Court could execute decree by applying provisions of C.P.C., or in a manner provided under any other law for the time being in force or at request of decree holder, which must be in writing. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXI, Rr. 84, 85 & 86---Non-deposit of 3/4 of auction money by purchaser within 15 days provided under proclamation--- Application by purchaser seeking extension of time for such deposit after expiry of stipulated period of 15 days---Acceptance of such application by Executing Court---­Validity---Language of O.XXI, Rr. 84 & 85, C.P.C., was mandatory in nature---Language used in proclamation requiring deposit of 3/4 purchase money within 15 days of sale was borrowed from mandatory provisions of O. XXI, R. 85, C.P.C.---Such failure for being violative of mandatory conditions provided under proclamation had rendered sale/auction proceedings as nullity---Executing Court in case of such failure could forfeit deposited amount and order resale of property, resultantly defaulting purchaser would forfeit all claims to property---Violation of such condition would not empower Executing Court to extend unilaterally time for deposit of such money---Executing Court had wrongly entertained such belated application and that too without notice---Principles. Afzal Maqsood Butt v. Banking Court No. 2, Lahore and others PLD 2005 SC 470 and Manilal Mohanlal Shah and others v. Sardar Sayed Ahmed Sayed Mahmad and others AIR 1954 SC 349 rel. (c) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----S. 19---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXI, Rr.54(2), 67, 84 & 85---Execution of decree---Sale of mortgaged property, confirmation of---Objection petition by debtor that no auction was held and entire auction proceedings were fictitious and fraudulent; that proclamation issued neither mentioned venue…
🔒
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