| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 3039 2003 SLD 3039 2003 CLD 1406 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Original Suit No. 63 of 2001, decision dated: 30-07-2002, hearing DATE : 19-07-2002.
MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J
Abdul Hameed Chohan for Plaintiff. Kh. Asif Mehmood for Defendant No. 1 Imtiaz Rashid Siddiqui for Defendants Nos.2 and 3. Mansoor Ali Shah for Defendants Nos.4, to 7. Khalid Mehmood Khan for Defendant No. 10. Defendants Nos. 8 and 11 to 15. Ex parte (on
Civil Original Suit No. 63 of 2001, decision dated: 30-07-2002, hearing DATE : 19-07-2002.
MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J
Abdul Hameed Chohan for Plaintiff. Kh. Asif Mehmood for Defendant No. 1 Imtiaz Rashid Siddiqui for Defendants Nos.2 and 3. Mansoor Ali Shah for Defendants Nos.4, to 7. Khalid Mehmood Khan for Defendant No. 10. Defendants Nos. 8 and 11 to 15. Ex parte (on
BANK OF KHYBER --Plaintiff
VS
. Messrs SPENCER DISTRIBUTION LTD. and 14 others----Defendants
Law:
Section:
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss.9 & 10---Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881), Ss.20 & 118---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S.233---Suit for recovery of loan amount---Application for leave to defend--¬Defendants admitted signatures on letters of guarantees, but disputed the amount mentioned therein---Defendants in leave application did not disclose amount of finance. availed; amount paid by them; dates of payment; amount of finance and other amounts relating to finance payable by them to Bank; amount of finance and other amounts disputed by them---Effect---Defendants had neither complied with provisions of S.10(4)(5) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 nor had shown sufficient cause for their inability to do so---No leave application, thus, would be deemed to be pending---Leave application filed was liable to be rejected as per mandatory provisions of S.10(6) of the Ordinance---Defendants had admitted availing of loan facilities by company (principal debtor) and their signatures on documents annexed with plaint---Bald denial of execution of documents by defendants was an attempt to wriggle out of their contractual obligations---No defence at all had been taken by company---If conceded that documents had been given blank, even then in view of Ss.20 & 118 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, defendants were estopped to challenge legality, validity and genuineness thereof---In view, of execution of personal guarantees and other documents, defendants could not shirk from liquidating their liabilities as they were jointly and severally liable to liquidate liabilities of company under provisions of Contract Act, 1872---Defendants had failed to raise any serious and bona fide dispute warranting grant of leave to defend suit--¬Leave application was dismissed being not maintainable and on merits as well. Muhammad Sharif v. Muhammad Hashim Paracha and another PLD 1987 Kar. 76; S.K. Abdul Aziz v. Mahmoodul Hassan and 3 others 1988 CLC 337; Haji Karim another v. Zikar Abdullah 1973 SCMR 100; Allied Bank of Pakistan Ltd. v. Messrs Gujrat Friends Traders and others PLD 1988 Lah.…
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