Law:

Section:

Banking Tribunals Ordinance (LVIII of 1984)-------Ss. 2(a)(iii), (e) 5(3) & 13--=Constitution of Pakistan (1,973), Art. 199--­Constitutional jurisdiction---Jurisdiction of Tribunal---Validity---"Finance"--­Definition---Petitioner-Company which took on lease five motor vehicles from respondent, having failed to pay to respondent lease amount according to terms of agreement arrived at between the parties, respondent filed suit for recovery of lease amount against petitioner before Banking Tribunal---Petitioner had challenged jurisdiction of Banking Tribunal contending that transaction in question was not covered by definition of "finance" as appearing in Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984---Tertn "finance" included an accommodation or facility under a system which provided on the basis of participation in profit and loss, mark-up or mark-down in price, hire-purchase, lease, rent sharing and licensing etc. ---Accommodation/facility as envisaged in the agreement arrived at between the parties, was availed by petitioner-Company and agreement in essence related to financial transaction between the parties---Terms of agreement clearly showed that agreement in question was .covered by definition of "finance" as given in S. 2(e) of Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 and respondent was a company within meaning . of S. 2(a)(iii) of that Ordinance---Tribunal under S. 5(3) of Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 had exclusive jurisdiction to decide question as to existence or otherwise of the "finance"---Tribunal, thus, was the only forum available to respondent for deciding his claim---Contention of petitioner that Tribunal had no jurisdiction to decide case of respondent, was repelled. ---[Words and phrases--Jurisdiction]. JUDGMENT NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, J. ---The petitioners have challenged the order dated 27-4-1995, passed by respondent No. l the Banking Tribunal, Karachi, whereby the petitioners' application challenging jurisdiction of said Tribunal was dismissed. The facts relevant. for decision of this petition are as follows: The respondent No.2 M/s. Natover Motor Lease Ltd. had filed a suit for recovery of Rs.6,82,729 against the petitioners before said Tribunal on…

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