Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2135 2004 SLD 2135 2004 CLD 1356
Lahore High Court
R.F.A. No. 150 of 1998, heard on 4-11-2003.
SYED, JAMSHED ALI AND MUHAMMAD GHANI, JJ
Mian Nasir Mahmood for Appellants. Saqib Salim for
Respondent.

Messrs ITTEFAQ INDUSTRIES (REGD.) through Managing Partner and 2 others --Appellants

VS

. BANK OF PUNJAB through Duly Constituted Attorney --Respondent

Law:

Section:

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) -- S.22 Incomplete statement of accounts, validity of Suit for recovery was filed by the bank against the appellants on the basis of alleged default made by the latter against a finance facility availed from the former Application for grant of leave to defend was dismissed and the suit of the bank was decreed by the Trial Court Appeal was filed by the appellants against the said decree Contention of the appellants was that the statement of accounts submitted by the bank alongwith the suit was incomplete and the payments made by the appellants during the course of time to discharge their liabilities were suppressed ¬Validity Complete statement of accounts from the date of availing the finance facility till the date of filing the suit was not placed on the record by the bank Since, finance facility was based on mark up, the bank was not entitled to claim anything in excess of the amount outstanding against appellants Appellants were only liable to pay the outstanding amount after taking into consideration the payments made by them from the date of availing of the facility till the institution of the suit ¬Quantum of liability of the appellants was to be worked out on the basis of receiving evidence particularly the complete statement of accounts Appeal was allowed, in the circumstances. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) S.10 Bank of Punjab Act (XII of 1989), Ss. 9, 10,11(3) & 25 ¬Leave to appear and defend Contention of the appellants was that the suit was instituted by the bank through a person, in whose favour the power of attorney was executed by the Managing Director, who was not competent to do so as it was only the Board of Directors who could appoint and constitute a valid attorney to act on behalf of the bank and therefore, suit, not having been filed through a duly constituted attorney, was liable to be dismissed Validity According to S.11(3) of Bank of Punjab Act, 1989 the Managing Director of the bank was the Chief Executive Officer and subject to bye laws in this behalf, could direct and control on behalf of the Board the affairs of…
🔒
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