| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 281 1994 SLD 281 1994 MLD 271 |
Sindh High Court
Civil Revision Application No. 53 of 1988, decision dated: 16-12-1989
SYED HAIDER ALI PIRZADA, J
S. Hamid Hussain for Applicant. Muhammad Idrees for
Respondent
Civil Revision Application No. 53 of 1988, decision dated: 16-12-1989
SYED HAIDER ALI PIRZADA, J
S. Hamid Hussain for Applicant. Muhammad Idrees for
Respondent
HABIB BANK LIMITED
VS
JAMILUR REHMAN
Law: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Section: 84(2)
Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)--S.84(2)---Out-dated draft ---Encashment of---Payment on. bank draft presented to bank after about seventeen months from its issue was refused on ground that same was out-dated---Cheque presented more than six months after ostensible date of its issue, was considered a stale one---Period of six months was allowed for presentation of cheques according to practice " of banks---Cheque or negotiable instrument was over due, or stale when it appeared on face of it to have been in circulation for an unreasonable length of time---Payment of draft presented after seventeen months, was rightly refused as draft had become out of date or stale. Griffiths v. Dalton (1940) 2 KB 264 ref. JUDGMENT This is a defendant's revision petition directed against the judgment and decree, dated 22-12-1987 passed by the Judge Small Causes Court, Karachi whereby he decreed the suit filed by the respondent. The facts leading to the filing of the above revision petition are that the respondent is a practising Advocate and in the month of January, 1985 he received a Bank Draft bearing No. 0163846, dated 17-1-1985 issued by Riyadh Bank, Harf-al-Batin, Saudi Arabia for Rs.1,000 from his client Muhammad Iqbal towards his professional fee. The respondent averred in the plaint that unfortunately the Bank Draft, on receipt, was misplaced somewhere in case files of the respondent and could not be located/found earlier than May, 1986. It is further averred that after finding it the respondent deposited the aforesaid Draft with his bankers viz. U.B.L. Compbell Street Branch, Karachi for collection and payment to him. It is the case of the respondent that on presentation to the petitioner, the same was refused to be paid on the ground that the same is out-dated. The respondent served legal notice, dated 12-8-1986. As the petitioner did not pay the amount the respondent filed suit No.74 of 1987 against the petitioner. The petitioner filed written statement. The petitioner pleaded in the written statement that the petitioner refused the payment because the draft had become outdated and stale. The petitioner pleaded in the written statement that the Draft was ofโฆ
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