2002 PLP 609 (CLD)

Asad Munir for Petitioner. M. Yaqub Khan for Respondent. The petitioner filed a suit against the respondent‑Bank stating that he had not stood guarantee in the matter of loan facility provided by the respondent‑Bank to Messrs Shafie Woollen Industries Ltd., Lahore. It was stated that he had not executed any such document and came to know about its existence only when the respondent‑Bank had filed a suit for recovery of the money against the said company and the petitioner. Prayer. made in the plaint was that the said document be declared to be illegal and void and ineffective upon the rights of the petitioner. The respondent‑Bank contested the suit and also raised objection that the Civil Court would not be having jurisdiction as the matter relates to the jurisdiction of Banking Tribunal. This objection found favour with the learned trial Court who rejected the plaint vide order, dated 29‑7‑1990. First appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Lahore on 1‑11‑1995. Both the learned Courts below rejected the plaint and upheld the rejection recording the fording that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction and the jurisdiction vests in the Banking Tribunal exclusively.

2. This civil revision was admitted to regular hearing on 27‑11‑1996 but it could not be taken up for hearing. Today when it came up for hearing before this Court the said Tribunal no longer exists and the suit filed by the respondent is now before Banking Court‑II, Lahore.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that his client had been pursuing the matter under bona fide impression that the Banking Tribunal as per the Banking Tribunals Ordinance, 1984 could not be having the jurisdiction to entertain the suit filed by his client who is alleged to be the guarantee.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent‑Bank on the other hand, urges that the Banking Tribunal had the jurisdiction to deal with the matter. Be that as it may, at the moment this discussion would be more or less futile in view of the change that has taken place inasmuch as the Banking Tribunal no longer exists, the matters are being dealt with by the Banking Courts and the laws covering the jurisdiction of the said Courts to provide for filing of suit by company as well as the customer or borrowers. The question may arise as to whether the guarantee would be included within the meaning of the term "borrower and customer". However, for the order I propose to pass in this civil revision the decision of this question would not be material.

5. This civil revision is disposed of with a direction that the file of this case, which even otherwise automatically stands transferred to the said Banking Court, shall be sent by the learned District Judge, Lahore to the said Court where it will be taken up alongwith the suit filed by the respondent‑Bank and the question as to whether or not the petitioner had executed a valid guarantee or had otherwise guaranteed the repayment of loan shall be decided by the said Banking Court in accordance with law. No order as to costs. S.A.K./P‑77/L Order accordingly