Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 1559 2005 SLD 1559 2005 CLD 347
Lahore High Court
Suit No.77 of 1998, decision dated: 3rd August, 2004
MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR, J
Jawad Hassan and Muzamil Ashraf Qureshi for CIRC Ch. Muhammad Ashraf and M.A. Ghaffar ul Haq for Defendants Nos. 1 to 4.

UNITED BANK LIMITED --Appellant

VS

. Messrs HAFIZ BROTHERS and others --Respondents

Law:

Section:

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (LX VI of 2001) Ss.9 & 10 Recovery of bank loan Liquidated damages Proof Misappropriation of goods imported by defendants against Letter of Credit Suit for damages filed by defendants against bank, pending disposal Defendants admitted opening of Letter of Credit and availing of finance facility Goods were imported and duly reached Pakistan ¬Plea raised by the defendants was that the plaintiff bank had misappropriated the goods Validity Question whether the goods were misappropriated by the bank or were sold by the defendants could not be gone into in the present suit Bank had lodged F.I.R. against defendants for the theft of the goods and the defendants had filed suit for recovery of damages If the suit for recovery of damages would be decreed, the defendants could recover the amount Finance obtained by the defendants was duly secured by separate documents Application for leave to defend the suit was dismissed High Court refused to give liquidated damages as the same were not proved Suit was decreed accordingly. Saudi Pak Industrial and Agricultural Investment Company (Pvt.) Ltd. Islamabad v. Messrs Allied Bank of Pakistan and another 2003 CLD 596 fol. ORDER The plaintiff (Bank) filed a suit for recovery of Rs.2,04,73,736.86 against the defendants before the Banking Tribunal, Bahawalpur on 19 1 1994 under the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984. An ex parte decree was passed against the defendants by the Banking Court No.2, Bahawalpur on 26 11 1998. The defendants made an application C.M. No.774 B of 2001 for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 26 11 1998. After the promulgation of Corporate and Industrial Restructuring Corporation Ordinance 2000 the defendant No.1 was declared as "non-performing asset" and was taken over by the CIRC (Corporate and Industrial Restructuring Corporation) under section 18 of the aforementioned Ordinance and it (CIRC) substituted the Bank. After the receipt of the case in this Court the ex parte decree dated 26 11 1998 was set aside vide order dated 10 12 2002. The facts adumbrated in the plaint are that the defendant Company was allowed a Non Refund Based Finance…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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