2002 PLP 1707 (CLD)
ABDUL RAZZAQ‑‑‑Appellant Versus A. D. B. P. ‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1707 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Jawwad S. Khawaja and Abdul Shakoor Paracha, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL RAZZAQ‑‑‑Appellant Versus A. D. B. P. ‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1707 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1707 (CLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Jawwad S. Khawaja and Abdul Shakoor Paracha, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1707 (CLD) (ABDUL RAZZAQ‑‑‑Appellant Versus A. D. B. P. ‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mian Tariq Ahmad for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) ‑‑‑‑Ss. 10 & 22‑‑‑Suit for recovery of money‑‑‑Leave to defend‑‑‑Plea of defendant was that he had not issued any cheque for drawing amount in question from Bank‑‑‑Banking Court rejected application for leave to defend and passed the decree‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑None had appeared for the Bank to controvert the statement or produce in Court the cheque issued by defendant‑‑‑Banking Court dismissed such application without justification, though defendant had shown a substantial defence‑‑‑High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment/decree, allowed the application filed by defendant for leave to appear and defend the suit, and remanded the case to Banking Tribunal for its decision as a regular long cause.
Judgment & Decree
The process‑server has reported that the respondent‑Bank has been served. None has appeared for the Bank. It is, therefore, proceeded against ex parte.
2. It is contended on behalf of the appellant Abdul Razzaq that he did not issue any cheque for drawing the amount of Rs.1,80,000 claimed by the respondent‑Bank in its suit. None has appeared for the Bank to controvert this statement or to produce in Court the cheque which may have been issued by Abdul Razzaq appellant.
3. In the above circumstances, we find that the application submitted by Abdul Razzaq before the learned Banking Court seeking leave to appear and defend was dismissed without justification and even though the appellant had shown a substantial defence as noted above. In this view of the matter, we allow this appeal and set aside the judgment and decree dated 19‑10‑2001. We also allow the application filed by Abdul Razzaq appellant seeking leave to appear and defend. The case is remanded to the learned Banking Court No. II, Gujranwala to be proceeded with and decided as a regular long cause. S.A.K./A‑538/L Case remanded.