Law:

Section:

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)-------Ss. 9 & 15---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2, Ss.151 & 10---Arbitration Act (X of 1940), S.34---Suit for declaration and injunction against bank--Application for injunction to restrain bank from selling mortgaged property---Decision of interlocutory application filed by defendant before deciding the application for leave to defend---Scope---Service of notices under S.15 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001---Procedure--Plaintiffs filed suit seeking declaration that notices issued by defendant-bank under S.15(2) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, for sate of their mortgaged properties were illegal, void and of no legal effect---Plaintiffs also filed application under O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2 read with S.151, C.P.C. to restrain defendant (Bank) from selling properties mortgaged with it---Plaintiffs contended that before deciding any application filed by them, Court teas first to decide application for grant of leave to defend the suit that defendant charged mark-up in excess of what was agreed upon between parties; that defendant bank's facility was fully secured and notices in question had been issued mala fide and without lawful authority-Validity--Application on behalf of defendant was normally not entertained without first deciding whether defendant was entitled to grant of leave or not, but if plaintiff had filed application and delay in deciding application might cause prejudice to defendant while hearing such application on its merits, defendant's contention could be looked into---Even application under S.10, C.P. C. and application under S.34 of Arbitration Act, 1940, filed by defendant without deciding the application for leave could be heard and decided on its merits---Subsection (12) of S.15 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, provided that neither Banking Court nor High Court was to grant an injunction restraining the sale or proposed sale of mortgaged property unless Court was satisfied that no mortgage in respect of immovable property had been…

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