Law:

Section:

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss.9 & 10---Suit for recovery of loan amount---Application for leave to defend suit-Pleas raised by defendant, inter alia, were regarding illegal charging of mark-up and excessive charging of mark-up---Banking Court without giving findings on such pleas dismissed leave application and decreed suit---Validity---Bank in statement of accounts had charged mark-up after 30-4-1997, whereas plaintiff claimed that period of finance expired on 30-4-1997---Statement of accounts suffered from other discrepancies and glaring legal infirmities---Plaintiff had made out a case for grant of leave to defend suit--Plaintiff had disputed amount of mark-up and admitted remaining decretal amount---High Court accepted leave application only to consider question of mark-up, subject to deposit of remaining decretal amount by plaintiff within specified time, failing which leave application would be deemed to be dismissed---High Court remanded case to Banking Court for its decision after framing issue on question of mark-up and recording evidence. JUDGMENT MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J.---The appellants/defendants, through the present appeal, have assailed the judgment and decree dated 4-3-2003, whereby the learned Judge Banking Court, after rejecting appellant's application for leave to defend the suit, proceeded to pass a decree, to the tune of Rs.42,84,660 together with costs and costs of funds, favouring the respondent-Bank. 2. The respondent-Bank filed the suit, before the Banking Court, against the appellants, for the recovery of Rs.44,06,016 in the following manner:-- "(a) Mark-up on cash finance for the period of 13-10-1996 to 30-4-1997 Rs.10,01,234 (b) Forced Demand Finance, of the guarantee, Issued on 6-8-1996. Rs.22,50,000 (c) Mark-up on forced demand finance/Guarantee. Rs.11,54,782 Total Rs.44,06,016" It was pleaded that the appellants availed the cash finance facility of Rs.12.500 millions; they repaid the principal amount of cash finance but the mark-up amount of Rs.10,01,234 remained unpaid. It was further the case of the respondent-Bank that the limit of bank guarantee was renewed, however, when the…

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