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

Section: 22

(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--S.22 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Ss. 5, 29(2) & Art. 156 Appeal before High Court against /decree of Banking Court Condonation of delay Application under S.5 of Limitation Act, 1908 Maintainability Under ordinary law,' period of 90 days was prescribed under Art.l56 of Limitation Act, 1908 for filing first appeal before High Court Present appeal was governed by provisions of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, which was a special law and S.22(1) thereof prescribed a period of 30 days for filing such appeal Such special law had provided different period of limitation than ordinary law for filing present appeal Held: S.5 of Limitation Act, 1908 would not apply to present appeal Such application was, thus, misconceived and not maintainable. Allah Ditta v. Farooq Ahmad and 3 others PLD 1979 Lah. 917; Bashir Ahmad and others v. Messrs Habib Bank Ltd. 1990 CLC 1105; Ali Muhammad and another v. Fazal Hussain and others 1983 SCMR 1239 and Allah Dino and another v. Muhammad Shah and others 2001 SCMR 286 rel. (b) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) S.22(1) Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLI, R.3 High Court (Lahore) Rules and Orders, Vol. V, Chap. 1, R.4 Appeal Condonation of delay of 2 1/2 years Decree was passed on 3 12 2001 Appeal was filed on 26 1 2002, which, after return by Office, was re filed on 29 1 2002, but Office on same date raised objection for removal of already raised objection Appeal was re filed on 30 10 2004 after removal of objection Plea raised by appellant in application under S.5 of Limitation Act, 1908 was that he was not informed by Office and on 23 10 2004, when he contacted Office, he was informed that case was in objection, over which lie made application for condonation of delay Validity Office had raised objection for second time on 29 1 2002, but appellant had not inquired about fate of his case for approximately 2 1/2 years If office did not inform appellant about objection raised in his case, even then he was grossly negligent as he waited for more than 2 1 /2…

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