| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2009 SLG 1871 2009 SLD 1871 2009 CLD 756 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.P.L.A. No.88-K of 2009, decision dated: 23rd February, 2009.
SABIHUDDIN AHMAD AND SARMAD, JALAL OSMANY, JJ
Ain-ud-Din Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Suleman Habibullah, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
C.P.L.A. No.88-K of 2009, decision dated: 23rd February, 2009.
SABIHUDDIN AHMAD AND SARMAD, JALAL OSMANY, JJ
Ain-ud-Din Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Suleman Habibullah, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN
VS
. MUHAMNIAD AYUB STONE CRUSHERS and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------S. 19---Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan Ordinance (XXXI of 1961), S.39---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXI, R.52 & O.XXXIV, R.13---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), Ss.48, 50 & 78---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S.50---Execution proceedings---Mortgage of same property by borrower in favour of Bank 'N' through prior registered deed and then in favour of another Bank by deposit of title deed---Sale of property by Banking Court to satisfy decree of said another Bank, but failure of Official Assignee to deliver possession of property to auction-purchaser for being attached by another court---Application by Bank 'N' for recalling such order of sale for having been obtained by concealment of its prior registered charge on property already attached by another Court in execution of decree---Acceptance of such application by Banking Court with direction to said another Bank to return sale proceeds to Bank 'N'---Validity---Registered mortgage in favour of Bank 'N' was prior in time, while simple mortgage by deposit of title deed in favour of said other Bank was later in time and unregistered---Other Bank's case was not that due to fraud, misrepresentation or gross negligence of Bank 'N' the other Bank had been induced to advance money to -debtor on security of already mortgaged property---Registered mortgage would be a notice to entire world of factum of its registration---Other Bank should have made efforts and exercise due care and diligence before advancing amount to -debtor on strength of property over which Bank 'N' had already a registered mortgage---Registered mortgage, even though later in time, would take priority over an earlier unregistered mortgage---Sale proceeds as per O.XXXIV, R.13, C.P.C., would be applied towards satisfaction of a prior mortgagee's debt before a subsequent mortgage could have any interest therein---Other Bank, despite having full knowledge about property being in custody of another Court on basis of attachment, had approached Banking Court for its sale and started inviting purchase offers on its own---Only Banking Court could…
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