Law:

Section:

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)------S.9---Suit for recovery of loan amount---Charging of mark­up/interest on principal amount beyond contract-agreement period---Entitlement---Mark-up/interest could only be charged under agreement between parties or if permissible under law, but not otherwise--Mark-up could not be charged beyond contract period. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----S.9---Suit by Bank for recovery of amount paid as penalty imposed upon borrower by State Bank for not exporting goods for which finance was awarded---Validity---State Bank under the rule and Scheme had authority to impose such penalty---Borrower had to incur burden of such penalty---Bank was well within right to claim and recover such amount. (c) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss.9 & 10---Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss.133 & 135---Suit for recovery of loan amount---Application by guarantor for leave to defend suit--Questions requiring consideration were: whether documents on basis of which guarantor was sued were executed by him with regard to loan facility for recovery of which suit was filed: whether in finance for which defendant stood surety had been adjusted, and thus he was discharged as guarantor---Leave to defend suit was granted to guarantor in circumstances. JUDGMENT MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.---The suit filed by the appellant-Bank against the respondent. No.1, as the principal borrower, a partnership concern; respondents Nos.2 to 4, as the partners of the said firm .and respondents Nos.5 and 6 as mortgagors/ guarantors of the finance, has been partly allowed by the learned Banking Court vide judgment and decree dated 20-2-2003. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 14-11-2002, the appellant brought a suit for the recovery of Rs.66,80,300 against the respondents and except respondent No.3, who did not file the leave application and was proceeded ex parte, all the other respondents moved such applications, which were dismissed. Yet, the learned Banking Court has awarded a decree for an amount of Rs.37,71,984.83; the decree for the remaining…

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