Law: Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984

Section: 6(4)

Law: Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act, 1997

Section: 7(1),7(6),7(7),15(1),28

Law: General Clauses Act, 1897

Section: 6

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 152, 7,2, 33,6

(1) Section 6 of Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 and Section 15 of the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act, 1997 (2) Doctrines of “intra petita/infra petita/ultra petita” (3) Effect of repeal under Section 6 of the General Clauses Act (4) The purpose of Section 152 CPC is to correct typographical, mathematical, or clerical errors but not to alter the substratum of judgment. Summary The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the Lahore High Court’s judgment and the Banking Court’s order only to the extent that they added markup through an amended decree. The Court held that the recovery suit had been instituted under the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984, and the bank could obtain only the relief claimed and legally available at the institution of the suit. The later 1997 Act could not retrospectively create or add a substantive entitlement to markup. Further, Section 152 CPC is confined to correcting accidental clerical, arithmetical, or typographical errors; it cannot be used to introduce a fresh substantive relief or alter the merits of a decree. Core Points Citibank filed a recovery suit in 1995 for Rs. 76,241,234.68 against the petitioners under the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984. The suit was decreed on 15.10.1999, but the claim for liquidated damages was not allowed. Later, the Bank moved an application under Section 152 CPC seeking inclusion of markup from the filing of the suit until realization. The Banking Court allowed the amendment, and the Lahore High Court upheld it in RFA No. 470/2000. The Supreme Court held that the amendment improperly introduced a new substantive relief—markup—which could not be granted through Section 152 CPC. The repeal of the 1984 Ordinance and enactment of the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act, 1997 did not retrospectively alter accrued substantive rights and liabilities. A transferred proceeding may continue before the new forum under Section 7 of the 1997 Act, but it cannot be decided by applying new substantive rights retrospectively unless the legislature clearly provides so. Order XLI Rule 33…