Law:

Section:

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss. 9, 19 & 22---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss. 145, 151, O.XXI & O.I, R.10---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 14---Suit for recovery of loan---Execution proceedings---Impleading of party, application for---Appellant had challenged application filed by Bank under 0.1, R.10, C.P.C. to implead appellant in execution proceedings contending that 0.1, R.10, C.P.C. was not applicable in execution proceedings---Validity---Provisions of 0.1, R.10, C.P.C. were not applicable in execution proceedings---Impugned order was set aside---Bank, however, was well Within its rights to file an application against appellant under S. 145, C.P.C. read with S. 151, C.P.C. and Banking Court would decide the same in accordance with law---Application for condonation of delay in filing appeal was allowed in view of S.14 of Limitation Act, 1908. Ramchandra Barik and others v. Dibakar Das AIR 1944 Patna 278; Rasib Khan v. Abdul Ghani PLD 1995 SC (AJ&K) 83; Dr. Maj. Abdul Ahad Khan v. Muhammad Iqbal PLD 1989 Kar. 102; Sherin v. Fazal Muhammad 1995 SCMR 584 and Bashir Ahmad v. Muhammad Sharif PLD 2001 SC 228 ref. ORDER The appellant has challenged the vires of order of the Banking Court dated 18-1-2003 through this appeal. Learned counsel of the appellant submits that respondent-Bank filed application under Order I, rule 10, C.P.C. to implead the appellant in the execution proceedings. He submits that Order I, rule 10, C.P.C. is not applicable in the execution proceedings. In support of his contention he relied upon the following judgments:-- Ramchandra Barik and others v. Dibakar…

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