Case Details

Citation(s)
2009 SLG 1904 2009 SLD 1904 2009 CLD 1185
Lahore High Court
Civil Original Suit No.82 of 1998, heard on 24-03-2009.
SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, J
Abid Aziz Sh. for Plaintiff. Sajid Mahmood Sh. for Defendant No. 5.

HABIB BANK LIMITED--Plaintiff

VS

. Messrs PEARL FABRICS LTD. Through Chief Executive and 7 others----Defendants

Law:

Section:

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------S.9---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.78---Suit for recovery of loan amount---Denial by defendant (Director of borrowing company) to have signed letter of personal guarantee---Proof---None of plaintiffs witnesses had stated that letter of guarantee was signed by defendant in their presence--Plaintiff had not examined either marginal witness or any one in whose presence such letter was executed---Defendant could riot be held liable on basis of corporate record already under challenge in civil suit---Signatures of defendant on admitted documents available on record did not resemble or tally with his signatures on disputed documents---Suit against defendant-guarantor was dismissed in circumstances. Zulfiqar Ali v. Muhammad Sikria 1998 CLC 900; Muslim Commercial Bank Ltd. v. Darya Khan Bangash 1994 MLD 1897; Abdul Waheed v. Zahida Parveen and others 2005 MLD 48 and Maqsood Ahmad v. Salman Ali PLD 2003 SC 31 ref. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art.78---Disputed signatures---Proof---Court in certain eventualities enjoyed plenary power to itself to compare signatures along with other relevant material to effectively resolve such dispute. Messrs Waqas Enterprises and others v. Allied Bank of Pakistan and others 1999 SCMR 85 rel. JUDGMENT SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, J.---The plaintiff instituted the suit for recovery of Rs. 313, 337,146 against the defendant No.1/ borrower company and its seven Directors who were sued as guarantors. Defendants Nos.2, 3, 6 and 7 through filing PLA 107-B-1998, sought leave to defend the suit. Defendant No.1, has failed to file, the application for leave to defend, within stipulated period. The suit was decreed on dismissal of PLA No.107-B of 1998, vide judgment and decree dated 27-10-1998. Defendant No. 5 subsequently filed an application C.M.No.1-B-1999 for setting aside ex parte decree, on the ground that wrong address of the applicant was mentioned in the plaint. The application was allowed and ex parte decree dated 27-10-1998, was set aside through order dated 1-3-2000. Defendant No.5 was allowed to file application for leave to defend the suit. The…
🔒
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