Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001

Section: 19 & 22

Law: Corporate and Industrial Restructing Corporation Ordinance, 2000

Section: 10

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XXI, Rr.66 & 89

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)------Ss. 19 & 22---Corporate and Industrial Restructuring Corporation Ordinance (L of 2000), S.10---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXI, Rr.66 & 89---Execution of decree---Confirmed sale of mortgaged property through public auction under order of the court---Objection of -debtors was about nominal sale, consideration as against the two offers made by them before the Court in terms of applications but no allegation was made about collusive, mala fide or illegal acts having been committed during the process of such sale---Judgment and decree under execution passed in suit followed by preparation of final decree-was not challenged in appeal by the -debtors---Such conduct of -debtors showed that not only the said decree had attained finality and was to be satisfied by the -debtors but they had also, at the earlier stage of the proceedings, accepted such liability to be paid to the Bank---Record showed that prior to the sale of the properties, another property was sold in the execution proceedings of the same decree, but the -debtors did not object to such sale though the Court which had also attained finality---Possession. of the two properties in question was admittedly obtained by the Nazir of the High Court much prior to the sale of these properties in favour of the auction-purchasers which was more .than sufficient notice of the execution proceedings to the -debtors, but even then they did not opt to attend/pursue or contest execution proceedings---During the period when the properties in question were competently sold through CIRC and soon thereafter the .market value of the immovable properties in the urban areas of the city, particularly in the areas where the properties in question were situated, had multiplied in no time; and it was in, such circumstances that the -debtor had given a second thought and opted to challenge confirmed transaction of sale of properties in favour of auction purchaser on the pretext of two applications---Grievance about low price raised by the -debtors, seemed to be unjustified and an afterthought in circumstances and their case was clearly hit by…