Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 1608 2005 SLD 1608 2005 CLD 836
Sindh High Court
C.M.As. Nos.2548 and 2424 of 2004 in Suit No.B-101 of 2000, decision dated: 17-02-2005.
MUSHIR ALAM, J
A.I. Chundrigar for Plaintiff. Rizwan Ahmed Siddiqui for Defendant No. 1. Nadeem Akhtar for Defendants Nos.6, 8 and 9. Qazi Faez Isa for the Remaining Defendants. Muhammad Zia Kiyani, Advocate.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN--Plaintiff

VS

. Messrs ZAMCO (PVT.) LIMITED and 9 others----Defendants

Law:

Section:

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------S. 7---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. I, R.10--¬Impleading of a necessary party---Creation of charge on property by the defendant---Dispute as to when the defendant who created the charge died was indeed a question that required consideration for the purpose of determination of the validity of the charge by the defendant---Person who was successor (husband) of the said defendant and was to step into her shoes and might avail the plea, that would have been availed by the deceased defendant, was ordered to be arrayed as newly added defendant. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----S. 7(2)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VI, R.17 & S.151---Amendment of pleadings---Where the plea raised is supplementary and not destructive that could be allowed to be raised and even the limitation would not come in way to raise such plea---Only consideration should be that the plea should not be inconsistent or divergent to the pleas raised in the plaint earlier. ORDER This listed Application (C.M.A. No.2548 of 2004) under Order I, rule 10(2) read with section 151, C.P.C. has been filed by Mr. Qazi Faez Isa, learned counsel on behalf of applicant/Intervenor, Qamaruzaaman Khan son of late Shujaat Ali Khan, who seeks joinder as a party to the proceeding. He contends that the said applicant seeks joinder in more than one capacity. According to him, he is the husband of Mrs. Mumtaz Khanum, the defendant No.5 (since deceased) and as her legal heir, he is entitled to be joined and arrayed as her successor-in-interest. He further contends that the property that was charged with the Bank, in fact, was Benami he is actual owner and late defendant No.5 along with her children who are the defendants Nos.2 to 4 were merely ostensible owners. The property was mortgaged with the Bank apparently after the demise of defendant No.5 in 1975 on fictitious documents. He further asserts that a suit for declaration of his right, title and interest has already been filed in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Rawalpindi which is still pending adjudication. It is,…
🔒
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