Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 2188 2008 SLD 2188 2008 CLD 823
Lahore High Court
E.F.A. No. 28 of 2008, heard on 24-03-2008.
SYED ASGHAR HAIDER AND HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, JJ
Sajid Mehmood Sheikh for Appellant. Muhammad Akram Pasha for
Respondent No. 1. Faisal Malik Buttar for
Respondent. Nemo for other
Respondents.

Syed AMJAD HUSSAIN JAFRI

VS

. KASB BANK LTD through Manager and 8 others

Law:

Section:

Financial Institution (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss. 9, 19 & 22---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXI, Rr.89 & 93---Suit for recovery of loan---Execution of decree--Auction of mortgaged property---Return of purchase money---Suit for recovery of loan filed by plaintiff-Bank having been decreed, Bank had filed execution petition and pursuant to that mortgaged property was directed to be sold---Said property was put to auction, but same was challenged---Banking Court found that property being commercial in nature and its sale price being well below the normal sale price in the market, same could not be confirmed and it was directed that auction purchaser would be returned the bid money and that -debtor would pay 5% of purchase price to auction purchaser in terms of O.XXI, R.89, C.P.C. as well as mark-up at the rate of 5% as purchase money of auction purchaser remained blocked for more than one year---Validity---Judgment-debtor had absolutely no role in the entire, exercise---Property which was sold at a lesser price, its auction was not confirmed---Imposition of any penalty in the shape of interest upon -debtor, in circumstances, was not only unreasonable, but was also unwarranted---Award of purchase money equivalent to 5% and mark-up to the extent of 5% was set aside and appeal was allowed to that extent. JUDGMENT SYED ASGHAR HAIDER, J.---Respondents Nos.2 to 6 availed a loan facility from the respondent No.1 (Bank) by mortgaging their properties. The stated respondents failed to liquidate their liability and thus became defaulters. The respondent No.1 filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 18,588,648.48 against them. The same was decreed. Later an execution petition was filed, pursuant to which the mortgaged property was directed to be sold. After dismissal of a number of applications in the execution petition, finally the property was put to auction but the same was challenged. While deciding this application the learned Banking Court held that the property is commercial in nature and its price of Rs.51,600,000 is well below the normal sale price in the market, the same was not confirmed. It, however, was directed that…
🔒
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