Case Details

Citation(s)
1969 SLG 212 1969 SLD 212 1969 PLD 301
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. K-33 of 1965, decision dated: 16th May 1969. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 5th June 1964, in Appeal No. 17 of 1956).
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., SAJJAD AHMAD AND ABDUS SATTAR, JJ
Md. Fazlur Rahman, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Ali Athar, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by J. F. C. Callahar, Attorney for R. F. Spickernell, Attorney on-Record No. 1.

THE OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE OF THE HIGH COURT OF WEST PAKISTAN AND others

VS

THE LLOYDS BANK LTD., KARACHI AND OTHERS Nos. 24: Ex parte.

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),S. 60 & O. XXXVIII, r. 5---Attachment---Property liable to attachment in election of decree---Banker and customer-Current credit balance of customer---Debt---Service of garnishee order by Court-Amount deposited with Bank in current account could be attached as debt and prohibitory injunction could validly issue on Bank. It is well-settled that as between the Bank and its constituents the current credit balance of the latter is a debt payable as such although no demand is made for its payment. In any case, the service of a garnishee order by the Court constitutes a demand by operation of law and ties up the whole credit balance in the current account of the party in respect of whom the order is made irrespective of the relative amounts of the and the balance. Therefore, the amount deposited with the Bank in the current account of a person could rightly be attached as a debt and the prohibitory injunction issued on the Bank would be perfectly valid. Rogers v. Whitelay 1892 A C 118 ref. (b) Banker and customer---- Money suit---Attachment of defendant's money lying in bank-Bank subsequently on receipt of a forged letter, purporting to be from Court and intimating that attachment has been raised, paying amount to its customer---­Held, in circumstances, that despite fact that Bank might have acted bona fide it was still not absolved of its liability to pay to third party in whose favour attachment had been made-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 60. & O. XXXVIII, r. 5. In a money suit the defendant's amount lying in a Bank was attached by the Court. Subsequently the Bank received a forged letter purporting to be from the Court and bearing the seal and signatures of the Nazir of the Court informing the Bank that the attachment had been raised. On the receipt of this letter the Bank informed its customer who in turn withdrew the entire amount from the Bank. A single Judge of the High Court held that the payment by the Bank in compliance with the forged order of the Court was made by the Bank at its own risk and the Bank was not absolved of its liability to deposit the attached amount as a garnishee. The Division Bench in…
🔒
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