Law:

Section:

Banking Tribunals Ordinance (LVIII of 1984) Ss.6 & 9 Suit for recovery of loan amount with liquidated damages and agreed return Refusal of Banking Tribunal to award liquidated damages and agreed return ¬Validity Bank was not entitled to amount of liquidated damages Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 did not empower Banking Tribunal to award amount of return ¬Bank, according to Islamic Mode of financing was not entitled to claim further amount of return, which had already been debited to account of defendant Impugned was in consonance with facts of the case and law on the subject High Court dismissed appeal. JUDGMENT MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J. Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan, the appellant, through the filing of the present appeal, under section 9 of the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984, has called in question judgment and decree dated 14 3 1996, whereby the then learned Banking Tribunal although partly decreed appellant's suit to the extent of Rs.3,19,065, yet declined to award a sum of Rs.1,15,334 being the amount of liquidated damages and Rs.51,173, the amount of agreed return. 2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that the appellant Bank filed a suit for recovery of Rs.9,99,612, together with costs, liquidated damages and the return, against the respondents, before the learned Banking Tribunal (since defunct). Pursuant to the receipt of notices, as provided under section 6(2) of the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984, the respondents filed the reply to the show cause notices and the then learned Banking Tribunal, ultimately, after finding that a sum of Rs.5,14,000 has already been deposited by the respondents, proceeded to partly decree the suit, to the extent of Rs.3,19,065, in favour of the appellant Bank, yet declined to award a sum of Rs.1,15,374, the amount of liquidated damages and Rs.51,173, the amount of agreed return, vide judgment and decree dated 14 3 1996, hence the present appeal. 3. Despite the service of notices, none has entered appearance to represent the respondents, thus they are proceeded ex parte. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant Bank has contended that although the appellant Bank was…

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