| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 3080 2003 SLD 3080 2003 CLD 1658 |
Lahore High Court
Regular First Appeal No.3 of 2003, decision dated: 22-05-2003.
TANVIR BASHIR ANSARI AND RUSTAM ALI MALIK, JJ
Zulifiqar Khalid Maluka for Appellants. Syed Iqbal Haider for
Respondent No. 1.
Regular First Appeal No.3 of 2003, decision dated: 22-05-2003.
TANVIR BASHIR ANSARI AND RUSTAM ALI MALIK, JJ
Zulifiqar Khalid Maluka for Appellants. Syed Iqbal Haider for
Respondent No. 1.
SILVER OIL MILLS (PVT.) LIMITED through Chief Executive and 13 others --Appellants
VS
. Messrs UNION BANK LIMITED through Vice President and 4 others --Respondents
Law:
Section:
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) -- S.10(11) Leave to defend the suit with condition attached When the defendant fails to fulfil the conditions attached to the grant of leave to defend, the Banking Court shall forthwith proceed to pass and decree in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant. Malik Gul Hasan and Company and 5 others v. Allied Bank of Pakistan 1996 SCMR 237; Abdul Rauf Ghouri v. Mrs. Kishwar Sultana 1999 SCMR 929; Abdul Karim Jaffarani v. U.B.L. and 2 others 1984 SCMR 568 and General Investment Limited v. Dubai Bank Limited 1984 SCMR 634 ref. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) -- Ss.22 & 10 Appeal Appellants cannot be permitted to re agitate the same question in appeal which has been effectively dealt with in their appeal filed earlier. (c) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) S.10 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXVII, R.3(2) Leave to appear and defend suit Banking Court upon application by defendant is fully competent to grant leave to appear and defend the suit either unconditionally or subject to such terms as it thinks fit Such discretion to grant leave conditionally or unconditionally is left to the Court itself as contemplated under O.XXXVII, R.3(2), C.P.C. Discretion so exercised is not to be interfered with lightly unless it is shown that the same was exercised in a fanciful or arbitrary manner. (d) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) Ss.22 & 10 Appeal Decree, in the present case, had been passed in favour of the Bank not on the basis of a trial before the Banking Court, but in consequence of failure of the appellants to fulfill the conditions imposed upon them by the Banking Court Contention of the appellants that as the High Court had dismissed the appeal as being incompetent, the other findings contained in the said would be inconsequential qua the rights of the parties, was a feeble attempt to wriggle out of the effects of the said . Dad Muhammad v. Qazi Muhammad Hayat 1996 CLC 1705 distinguished. (e) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of…
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