Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 730 2002 SLD 730 2002 CLD 1621
Lahore High Court
Regular First Appeal No.713 of 2001, heard on 18-06-2002
JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, JUSTICE ABDUL SHAKOOR PARACHA, JUSTICE
Mian Abdul Rashid I for Appellants. Burhan Sabir Mirza for
Respondents

Messrs MALIK & COMPANY through Sole Proprietor and others

VS

MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK through Salah ud Din, Branch Manager and others

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

Section: 17,22

Law: Bankers Books Evidence Act, 1891

Section: 4

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 152

Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--Ss. 17 & 22 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.152 ¬Bankers' Books Evidence Act (XVIII of 1891), S.4 Decree, amendment of Bank filed suit for recovery of Rs.13,18,171.58 with mark up Defendant filed application for leave to appear and defend Bank on Court's directive filed complete statement of accounts certified under Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891 Court after dismissal of leave application intended to pass decree in terms of the plaint for amount set out in statement of accounts, but instead of decreeing suit for principal amount and mark up thereon, passed decree for Rs.5,21,503.17, which was the amount of mark up only Principal amount of debt i.e. Rs.9,96,301.28, was not included in decree Banking Court through amendment passed decree for Rs.15,17,804.45 together with mark up thereon Validity Judgment in its terms was clear Decree had originally been passed for a sum of Rs. 5,21,503.17 only on account of miscalculation of principal amount Amount prayed for in the plaint was Rs.13,18,171.58 with mark up High Court modified impugned decree and decreed the suit for sum of Rs. 13,18,171.58 together with mark up thereon. JUDGMENT JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J. This appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 17 4 2001, which was amended by order dated 9 7 2001. 2. The case of the appellants defendants is that the amendment in the original decree, whereby a sum of Rs.9.96,301.28, was added to the original decretal amount of Rs.5,21,503, was not legally sustainable. 3. The facts of this case are straightforward. The respondent Bank filed a suit against the appellants seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.13,18,171.58 together with mark up thereon at the agreed rate. The appellants defendants filed an application seeking leave to appear anti defend. However, on 20 3 2001, the respondent Bank was directed to file in…
🔒
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