| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 594 2004 SLD 594 2004 CLD 748 |
Lahore High Court
First Appeal from Order No.200 of 2002, decision dated: 29-10-2002
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JUSTICE JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, JUSTICE
Muhammad Asghar Khan for Appellant. Farrukh Mehmood Solehria for ADBP. Muhammad Iqbal Akhtar for
Respondents Nos. 2 to 4.
First Appeal from Order No.200 of 2002, decision dated: 29-10-2002
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JUSTICE JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, JUSTICE
Muhammad Asghar Khan for Appellant. Farrukh Mehmood Solehria for ADBP. Muhammad Iqbal Akhtar for
Respondents Nos. 2 to 4.
JAVAID TANVEER MUGHAL
VS
AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER AND 3 OTHERS
Law: Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act, 1997
Section: 21
(a) Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997)------------S. 21---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.12(2)--Appeal ---Dismissal of application under S.12(2), C.P.C. by the Banking Court---Appeal against such order was not competent. (b) Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997)---S. 21---Appeal--- Limitation---Appeal had been filed on 8-6-2002 and computing the time from the date of delivery of the copy of order under appeal dated 24-4-2002, appeal was beyond the period of thirty days as prescribed under law---No plausible explanation qua the delay in filing appeal within 30 days of obtaining copy of the order having been given, appeal was dismissed as time-barred. ORDER Appellant is aggrieved of the order dated 31-7-2000, passed by the learned Judge Banking, whereby his application under section 12(2), C.P.C., for setting aside of the judgment and decree dated 3-12-1998, was dismissed. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that respondent-Bank filed a suit for recovery inter alia against the appellant, respondents Nos.2 to 4 and Messrs Automobile Armature Industries, of which the appellant and the said respondents were the partners, which was decreed on 3-12-1998. It may be pertinent to state here that the said decree was a consent decree, as defendant No.3, the partner of the firm made a statement to make the payment of the decretal amount, which offer was accordingly accepted by the Bank and the aforesaid decree was passed. The appellant did not file any appeal against the said decree, rather moved an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. on 12-4-1998. On this application, learned Court, directed the appellant, etc. to deposit the decretal amount in the Court, which order was not complied with and thus vide order dated 31-7-2000, the application was rejected. 3. We have been told by learned counsel for the respondent-Bank that the appellant and other defendants challenged the aforesaid decree, through a Writ Petition No.5527 of 1999, which was dismissed. Another petition to the same effect was also disallowed by this Court. These facts have not been disputed by…
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