| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2005 SLG 1586 2005 SLD 1586 2005 CLD 581 |
Lahore High Court
R.F.As. Nos.325 and 326 of 1999, decision dated: 10-01-2005.
MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, JJ
Imran Raza Khan for Appellants. Abdul Hameed Chauhan for
Respondent.
R.F.As. Nos.325 and 326 of 1999, decision dated: 10-01-2005.
MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, JJ
Imran Raza Khan for Appellants. Abdul Hameed Chauhan for
Respondent.
Messrs MOHIB EXPORTS LTD., and 4 others --Appellants
VS
. TRUST LEASING CORPORATION LTD. through Chief Executive --Respondent
Law:
Section:
(a) Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997) Ss.10 & 21 Application for grant of leave to defend the suit New plea Defendants were not allowed to raise altogether a new plea which was not the subject matter of their applications for the grant of leave to defend suit, for the first time before the High Court. Anwar Ali and others v. Manzoor Hussain and another 1996 SCMR 1770 and Amir Shah v. Ziarat Gul 1998 SCMR 593 ref. (b) Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997) Ss.10 & 9 Application for leave to defend the suit ¬Defend had raised a specific plea that plaintiff had charged mark up on mark up which was illegal and against the directives of the State Bank of Pakistan Impugned showed that although the said plea was raised by the defendant before the Banking Court yet the Court failed to give any findings on the statements of account; rather the said crucial plea had been brushed aside by the Banking Court by merely observing that "moreover presumption of truth is attached with the statements of account Effect ¬Held, it was legal obligation of the Banking Court to have rendered some findings on the question of charging mark up one way or the other: it appeared that Banking Court, without the application of its judicial mind and in complete oblivion of the impact of the objection, had, in a stereo type manner, observed that the presumption was attached to the statements of account Entries in the statements of account if dubious and challenged by the other party could not be taken as sufficient to prove bank's claim and no presumption of truth or correctness could be attached to such types of copies of statements of account Impugned of the Banking Court could hardly be called and termed as judicial order/ within the parameters set up by law and was in violation of the principles laid down on the subject and it definitely suffered from misreading of the record of the case High Court set aside the impugned s and remanded the cases to the Banking Court on the limited question of charging of mark up over mark up in the accounts of the defendants. Gouranga Mohan Sikdar v.…
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