| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2005 SLG 1593 2005 SLD 1593 2005 CLD 626 |
Sindh High Court
Suit No.366 of 1999, C.M.As. Nos.6245, 9127 of 2001, 299, 300 and 301 of 2002, decision dated: 17-01-2005.
MUSHIR ALAM, J
A. R. Akhter, Saalim Salam Ansari, Saadat Yar Khan, Aasim Mansoor and Sumiya Usmani, Advocates. Walid Ansari holding brief for Qazi Faez Issa, Advocate.
Suit No.366 of 1999, C.M.As. Nos.6245, 9127 of 2001, 299, 300 and 301 of 2002, decision dated: 17-01-2005.
MUSHIR ALAM, J
A. R. Akhter, Saalim Salam Ansari, Saadat Yar Khan, Aasim Mansoor and Sumiya Usmani, Advocates. Walid Ansari holding brief for Qazi Faez Issa, Advocate.
Messrs HABIB BANK LIMITED--Plaintiff
VS
. Messrs PAN ISLAMIC STEAMSHIP CO. LIMITED and 6 others----Defendants
Law:
Section:
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---S. 10---Suit for recovery of loan---Grant of leave to defend the suit---Defendant had sought unconditional leave to defend the suit urging that she being widow of the deceased guarantor, who was alleged to have executed the personal guarantee, no personal liability could be foisted on his legal heirs---Held, such controversy could only be resolved and decided at trial after looking at the guarantee---Unconditional leave to defend the suit was granted accordingly. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---S. 10---Suit for recovery of loan---Grant of leave to defend the suit---Defendant, a guarantor, had challenged the maintainability of the suit against him and disputed his signature on the letter of guarantee---In order to adjudicate the issue raised and to resolve factual and legal controversies leave to appeal was granted unconditionally. (c) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)----S. 10---Suit for recovery of loan---Grant of leave to defend the suit---Contention of the defendant was that his signatures on the letter of guarantee were forged and sought unconditional leave to defend the suit---Reports of Handwriting Experts were also on the record which created a doubt on the guarantee---Held, issue in question could only be determined and adjudicated at the trial---Defendant was granted leave to defend the suit accordingly. (d) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---S. 10---Suit for recovery of loan---Grant of leave to defend the suit---Contention of the defendants was that legal heirs were not liable under the purported guarantee which was alleged to have been executed by their father---Held, such an issue could be decided at trial---Matter in question being pending for quite some time for consideration, leave to appear and defend the suit was granted to the defendants accordingly. ORDER 1. Listed Application (C.M.A. No.6245 of 2001) under Order I, rule 10(2), C.P.C. seeks striking off the name of defendant No.2(b). Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff, Mr. A. R. Akhter,…
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