Case Details

Citation(s)
1993 SLG 578 1993 SLD 578 1993 SCMR 441
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.781 of 1990, decision dated: 29-11-1992, hearing DATE : 10-11-1992. (From the judgment dated 15-4-1990 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in R.FA. No.120 of 1983)
NASIM HASAN SHAH, ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM AND SALEEM AKHTAR, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Syed AHMAD SAEED KIRMANI

M/s. MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD., ISLAMABAD

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--O.VIII, R.6---Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance (XIX of 1979), S.2(2)---Suit for recovery of loan in summary jurisdiction---Claim of set off by defendant--- Essentials---Defendant setting up claim of set-off in defence which exceeded amount of loan---Trial Court accepting claim of set-off, awarded claimed amount to defendant minus the loan amount---High Court in appeal set aside decree relating to set-off on the ground that defendant had not pleaded specifically claim of damages, and in absence of any pleading, such damages could not have been allowed as set-off---Validity---Party claiming set­off had to comply with the rules of pleading contained in Civil Procedure Code, 1908---Defendant by claiming set-off of an amount which far exceeded the claim of plaintiff, in effect pleaded to write off plaintiff's claim and claimed a decree for the balance amount---Claim of set-off, was thus, in the nature of written statement as also a plaint (counter-claim) for purposes of claiming the balance amount---Rules of pleading, therefore, should be followed in all cases including cases where damages were claimed as set-off---Claimant (defendant) must state the particulars and basis of the claim and if same was qualified, basis of such qualification as well---Mere statement that due to breach committed by defaulting party claimant was entitled to damages, would not be proper pleading---Defendant's pleadings and evidence being vague and unspecific regarding his claim for set-off, same could not be decreed in his favour. Naimat Ali v. Jairam Dass PLD 1983 SC 5 and Domsalla and another v. Bart (Trading as A.B. Construction) and others (1969) 3 All E.R. ref. (b) Contract Act (IX of 1872)--- ----S.73---Breach of contract---Essentials---Party claiming damages due to breach of contract, must establish the contract, the breach thereof and the extent of damages---Onus would be on the person pleading breach of contract and without discharging same, he could not succeed---Only such damages could be recovered which would naturally arise in the usual course of things from such breach or the parties at the time of making the contract knew…
🔒
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