Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2055 2004 SLD 2055 2004 CLD 956
Lahore High Court
R.F.A. No. 141 of 1997, heard on 9-09-2003.
MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR AND MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, JJ
Mian Nasir Mehmood for Appellant. Nemo for
Respondent.

AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN --Appellant

VS

. ARSHAD ALI --Respondent

Law:

Section:

(a) Banking Tribunals Ordinance (LVIII of 1984) S.5 Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, (XLVI of 2001), S.7 Liquidated damages, award of Recovery suit was decreed by the Banking Tribunal but declined to award liquidated damages and future mark up to the Bank Validity ¬Bank was not entitled to recover the amount of liquidated damages. Allied Bank of Pakistan Ltd. Faisalabad v. Messrs Aisha Garments and others 2001 MLD 1955 ref. (b) Banking Tribunals Ordinance (LVIII of 1984) S.5 Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, (XLVI of 2001), S.7 Future mark up, award of Bank was not entitled to claim future mark up in view of basic concept of Islamic mode of financing Banking Tribunals Ordinance 1984 did not empower the Banking Tribunal to award future mark up. JUDGMENT MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J. Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan, appellant, through the filing of the present appeal, under section 9 of the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 (since repealed), has partially challenged the judgment and decree dated 1 8 1995, whereby the then learned Banking Tribunal (since defunct) although partly decreed the appellant's suit, for the recovery to the extent of Rs.31,747, yet declined to award the amount of liquidated damages and future mark up. 2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the filing of the present appeal are, that the appellant filed a suit for the recovery of Rs.2,16,896, against the respondent, before the then Banking Tribunal. Initially an ex parte decree was passed, however, subsequently on an application filed by the respondent the said decree was set aside. The respondent thereafter filed reply to the show cause notice, wherein although initial loan facility was admitted, yet the respondent denied the claims of the appellant relating to liquidated damages, future mark up and other charges. The learned Banking Court, after hearing the parties and upon consideration of the available record, came to the conclusion that the appellant is not entitled for liquidated damages and future mark up and sum of Rs.1,49,000 was already deposited by the respondent, which fact was not denied by the appellant-Bank, proceeded to…
🔒
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