| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 3027 2003 SLD 3027 2003 CLD 1783 |
Lahore High Court
E.F.A. No.79 of 2003, heard on 12-05-2002.
MIAN SAQIB NISAR AND, JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, JJ
Mian Sohail and Aish Bahadur Rana for Appellants. Muhammad Shuja Babar and Muhammad Iqbal for
Respondents.
E.F.A. No.79 of 2003, heard on 12-05-2002.
MIAN SAQIB NISAR AND, JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, JJ
Mian Sohail and Aish Bahadur Rana for Appellants. Muhammad Shuja Babar and Muhammad Iqbal for
Respondents.
Messrs A.M. RICE CORPORATION through Sole Proprietor and another --Appellants
VS
. BANK OF PUNJAB through Branch Manager and another --Respondents
Law:
Section:
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) S.22 Stay by Appellate Court Failure to comply with the direction of Appellate Court Appellants had filed stay application against execution proceedings alongwith appeal Appellate Court directed the appellants to deposit a sum of Rs.20,00,000 but they failed to comply with the direction of the Appellate Court Effect Such order of the Appellate Court was only confined to the stay of execution of decree and if the appellants had not deposited the amount, the execution could be carried on but no mala fides could be attributed to the appellants in circumstances. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) -- Ss.19 & 22 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXI, R.90 Appeal Sale of mortgaged property, setting aside of Grievance of debtor was that no sale was conducted at the site and all the proceedings in that behalf were fictitious and fraudulent Executing Court without framing of issues just on auction report dismissed the objection Validity Such question could not be resolved by the Executing Court without framing of issues and enabling' the parties to produce evidence Executing Court could not have rejected the objections of debtor just on the basis of auction report Sale' was set aside and the case was remanded to Executing Court with a direction to decide objection petition after framing of issues and .recording of evidence produced by parties Appeal was allowed accordingly. (c) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) -- S.19 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXI, R.90 ¬Setting aside of sale Inadequacy of sale price Bank at the time of mortgage of the property had got the property evaluated for a sum of Rs.1,04,27,000 but subsequently the reserve price was fixed for an amount of Rs.4,500,000 without taking the Executing Court in confidence and the property was sold for Rs.46,00,000 Validity Mere inadequacy of sale price by itself was no ground for setting aside the sale Executing Court should have considered the sale on the basis of some material placed on record by the Bank to justify that the reserve price fixed was…
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