Law:

Section:

Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997)------Ss.9 & 10---Recovery of Bank loan---Conditional leave, grant of --Charging of illegal and exorbitant mark-up---Leave to appear and defend the suit was not granted and the suit was decreed in favour of the bank---Defendants admitted availing of the loan but disputed charging of mark-up--¬Grievance of the defendants was that the mark-up had been charged illegally and exorbitantly and the same could not be recovered from them---Validity---Only dispute being about the charge of mark-up and not in respect of the principal amount, interest of justice would, therefore, adequately be secured if the defendants were granted leave to defend subject to deposit of principal amount in cash and the rest of the dispute might be allowed to be decided by the Banking Court---Banking Court had not adverted to the crucial aspect of the case and mechanically passed the impugned and decree without attending to the contention raised by the defendants with regard to the .charging of mark-up---Judgment and decree passed by Banking Court was set aside, defendants were granted leave to defend the suit with a condition to deposit principal amount and the case was remanded to the Banking Court for decision afresh accordingly. Ch. Sarfraz Ahmad and M. Anwar Sipra for Appellants: Nadeem Saeed for Respondent. ORDER Present appeal calls in question judgment and decree dated 27-3-2001, whereby the learned Judge Banking Court passed a decree for the recovery of Rs.6,66,419 alongwith costs and mark-up against the appellants. 2. Precisely stated, the facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that appellant No.1, admittedly, on 6-11-1998, obtained a finance facility of Rs.4,95,000, under Prime Minister Self-Development Scheme, and appellant No.2 stood as guarantor. As the appellants did not liquidate the outstanding liability and, reportedly, committed default, therefore, the respondent-Bank filed a suit for the recovery of Rs.6,66,419, before the learned Judge Banking Court, against the appellants, alleging therein that the financial facility was availed by appellant No.1, appellant No.2…

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