| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2009 SLG 1828 2009 SLD 1828 2009 CLD 53 |
Lahore High Court
C.R. No.1713 of 2007, decision dated: 31st October, 2008.
ALI AKBAR QURESHI, J
Rana Nasrullah Khan for Petitioner.
C.R. No.1713 of 2007, decision dated: 31st October, 2008.
ALI AKBAR QURESHI, J
Rana Nasrullah Khan for Petitioner.
SHAUKAT HAYAT
VS
. SHAKIL AHMAD MUGHAL
Law:
Section:
Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997)-------Ss.18 & 27---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.9, O.VII, R.11(d) & O.XXI, Rr.89, 92---Execution of decree---Auction of property by Banking-Court-Civil suit challenging such auction on the ground that property was undivided, regarding which partition suit was pending; and that property was not mortgaged with decree-holder Bank, rather same was owned by plaintiff, who was not -debtor in decree under execution---Maintainability---Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain a suit challenging and decree or any action of Banking Court---Only remedy available to plaintiff to challenge auction was by filing of objection petition before Banking Court, which had jurisdiction to validate or invalidate auction, if not conducted in accordance with law---Plaint was rejected in circumstances. Pakistan Fisheries Ltd., Karachi and others v. United Bank Ltd. PLD 1993 SC 109 and S. M. Shafi Ahmad Zaidi through Legal Heirs v. Malik Hassan Ali Khan (Moin) through Legal Heirs 2002 SCMR 338 rel. ORDER ALI AKBAR QURESHI, J.--- This civil revision is directed against the order dated 2-7-2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sialkot whereby the order of the learned trial Court to reject the plaint under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. was set aside and the case was remanded for afresh decision. 2. The respondent instituted a suit questioning the auction made by the learned Banking Court No.4, Lahore in execution of a decree passed in the suit titled as Grindlays Bank Limited v. Samanda and Sons Suit No.41 of 1997. The said property was purchased by the petitioner on 23-6-2000 and in consequence of the said sale, a sale certificate was issued to the petitioner on 18-7-2000, The petitioner mainly challenged the sale on the ground that the property was part of joint Khata and undivided, therefore, the sale of the land giving specific area and number could not be auctioned. The petitioner filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 read with section 151, C.P.C. whereas the other defendants of the suit filed, the consenting written statement in the application under Order VII…
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