Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 621 2004 SLD 621 2004 CLD 857
Lahore High Court
First Appeal from Order No.186 of 2002, heard on 27-01-2003
MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR, JUSTICE MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, JUSTICE
Muhammad Nawaz Khokhar for Appellants. Farrukh Mahmood Sulehria for
Respondents.

MESSRS AMMAR RICE DEALERS AND 2 OTHERS

VS

NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS

Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)

Section: 10

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---Ss.10(1), 12 & 22---Ex parte decree due to non­appearance of defendant after filing leave application--­Application for setting aside decree under S.12 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 was dismissed by Banking Court---Validity---Defendant had been duly served and his application for leave to defend suit was pending---Remedy under S.12 of the Ordinance was, thus, not available to defendant and his application before Banking Court was not maintainable--- Banking Court had misdirected itself by proceeding to decide such application on merits---High Court also dismissed appeal being not competent. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR, J.---Succinctly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal are that respondent-Bank filed a suit on 18-10-2001 before the Banking Court No.2, Gujranwala, for recovery of Rs.8,42,427. The appellants/defendants filed an application for leave to defend the suit. None appeared on behalf of defendants, the suit against them was ex parte decreed on 21-1-2002. An application for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 21-1-2002, was moved on the ground that the learned counsel for the judgment-debtor inadvertently noted down the date of hearing as 6-2-2002 instead of 21-1-2002. The said application for setting aside the ex parte decree was dismissed vide order dated 19-4-2002. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the date of hearing was inadvertently noted down by the learned counsel and the mistake being bona fide, the Banking Court should have accepted the application for setting aside the ex parte decree. Conversely, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the remedy under section 12 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, was not available to the appellant. The only remedy was to file an appeal before this Court against- the judgment dated 21-1-2002. 3. We have gone through the relevant provisions of Ordinance XLVI of 2001. Section 12 of the said Ordinance reads as under:-- "Power to set aside decree.---In any case in which a decree is passed against a defendant under subsection…
🔒
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