1993 PLP 2503 (MLD)

‑‑‑S. 14‑‑‑Nomination papers‑‑‑Rejection of‑‑‑Nomination papers of candidate were rejected on ground that he had committed default in payment of loan‑‑ Candidate could not explain about sum which he owed to Punjab Co‑operative Board for Liquidation‑‑‑Disqualification earned by candidate as a defaulter due to non‑payment of loan have remained hung on him, his nomination papers were rightly rejected. Amir Alam Khan for Appellant Date of hearing: 7th September 1993. SARDAR MUHAMMAD DOGAR; J.‑‑‑The nomination papers of appellant were rejected by the learned Returning Officer on the ground that he had committed default in payment of loans of M/s Sutex, M/s. Swat Corn and Punjab Co‑operative Board for Liquidation, Lahore. The appellant was supposed to pay back a sum of Rs.2,152 million (Rs.21,52,000) to M/s. Sutex, a sum of Rs.3,745 million (Rs.374,5000/‑) to M/s Swat Corn and x sum of Rs.73,88,428 to Punjab Co‑operative Board for Liquidation, Lahore.

2. Learned counsel placed reliance on the certificate (now marked as 'A' and 'B') issued by the Allied Bank and Regional Development Finance Corporation, to canvass that the appellant had never obtained any loan from the said firms and so he could not have been dubbed as a defaulter. While denying the liability of the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.734,500 to Punjab Cooperative Board for Liquidation, Lahore, learned counsel submitted that in fact N.I.C.F.C had entered into partnership with the appellant and the members of the said partnership‑firm had participated in the bidding of collection of octroi of Municipal Corporation, Lahore and for that had deposited a sum of Rs.57 lags to fulfil condition for taking part in the bidding and that as the partnership‑firm had failed to fulfil other conditions, the amount was confiscated. Learned counsel while pressing the point that the appellant had not obtained any loan from the N.I.C.F.C. submitted that a sum of Rs.28 lacs alleged to be outstanding against him was also not received by him as a loan, but was given to him by the N.I.C.F.C. as contemplated profit of the business, which the partnership‑firm was to run.

3. We fail to understand as to how the N.I.C.F.C. would have paid a sum of Rs.28 lacs to the appellant as contemplated profit, when actually no business had been started. The only business, they attempted to do was to obtain a contract of collection of octroi of the Municipal Corporation, Lahore in that they had failed. The appellant failed to place anything else on record in support of the plea that some other joint venture was done by him. He also did not claim that any amount was received by the N.I.C.F.C. as anticipated profit or actually earned profit.

4. For the aforesaid reasons we are not convinced that the appellant has been able to explain about the sum, which he owes to the Punjab Cooperative Board for Liquidation. In the circumstances, even if the explanation of learned counsel for the appellant regarding the loans of M/s Sutex and M/s Swat Corn said to be outstanding against the appellant, was accepted the disqualification earned by the appellant as a defaulter due to non‑payment of loan, remains hung to him. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. H.B.T/88/E Appeal dismissed.