1994CLC275 (PLP)

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Order of detention enforced against defaulter of Bank loan‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Petitioner's father had obtained loan from Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan‑‑‑One of the conditions of such loan stipulated that heirs, successors and assignees of a debtor, on his death would be individually and severally liable for re‑payment of loan in question‑‑‑Petitioner being the male heir of debtor, creditor could enforce his claim against him or any of the heirs‑‑‑In case of default matter could validly be referred to Revenue Authorities‑‑‑Detention of a defaulter could be the first option, although steps could also be taken for action and sale of property pledged by loanee‑‑‑Petitioner by initiating proceedings against recovery was only aiming at evading his liability to frustrate efforts made by creditor towards recovery of amount of loan‑‑‑Petitioner was evidently making a bid to delay or defer payment in question, which he was under an unquestionable liability to make, as male successor‑in‑interest of the loanee‑‑‑ Petitioner could not be allowed to achieve such unholy object and that too, through process of Court‑‑‑Proceedings taken against petitioner having legal basis, interference by High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction was not warranted. Muhammad Qasim Khan for Petitioner. Abdul Latif Khan Lodhi for Respondent No.2. Petitioner's father had allegedly obtained a loan of four lac rupees from the A.D.B.P., Abdali Road Branch, Multan, and on his death proceedings have been initiated for recovery of the loan amount from his legal heirs, including Ijaz Hussain petitioner, who. has challenged his liability by filing this writ petition and has in particular assailed the validity of the order of detention enforced against him.

2. It is to be borne in mind that under the Loan Agreement executed on 8‑3‑1990, Malik Allah Ditta, father of the petitioner, is shown to have been advanced the amount of loan in question by the A.D.B.P. and as postulated by condition No.12, heirs, successors and assignees of a debtor, on his death are individually and severally liable for repayment of such amount. It is up to the creditor to enforce his claim against any one of them. Under section 25 (2), A.D.B.P. Ordinance, 1961, the matter is referred to the Revenue Authorities, and under provisions of sections 81 to 90 of Land Revenue Act, proceedings are taken against such defaulters. Detention of a defaulter may be the first option, although steps may also be taken for action and sale of the property pledged by the loanee. Defaulter may be kept in civil detention or restraint for an initial period of ten days. There is an odd plea invoked by the petitioner in question his liability. He says that one Mazhar Javed, a Mobile Credit Officer of the A.D.B.P. had through forgery and fraud obtained a huge amount of four lac rupees as loan, in the name of the petitioner's father. The respondents have pointed it out to the Court that Mr. Mazhar Javed is husband of sister of the petitioner and further that even during his lifetime the petitioner's father Malik Allah Ditta had himself made certain payments, which fact would serve to dispel and disprove the aforesaid allegation of the petitioner. The petitioner is only aiming at evading his liability or frustrate the efforts made by the creditor towards recovery of the amount of loan. A bid has at least evidently been made to delay or defer the payment, which the petitioner is under an unquestionable liability to make, as male successor‑in‑interest of the loanee, late Malik Allah Ditta. This unholy object he cannot evidently be allowed to achieve and that too through process of the Court.

3. Considered from any angle, it cannot be said that the proceedings taken against the petitioner have no legal sanction. Interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan is not called for and the writ petition is rejected. AA./E‑20/L ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Petition dismissed.