2001 PLP 2188 (YLR)

‑‑‑‑Ss. 24. & 30‑‑‑Grant of loan ‑‑‑Non- payment of instalments by the borrower‑‑ Borrower having failed to pay instalments, Appellate Authority filed petition under S.30, House Building Finance Corporation Act, 1952 and during pendency of the petition the Court allowed payment of amount due in instalments with the observation that ‑in case of default in payment of two instalments the total amount would become due‑‑‑Authority challenged the order of payment through instalments contending that without consent of the Authority, instalments could not have been allowed‑‑‑Borrower who made certain payments after the order of the Court had asserted that under the Prime Minister's Incentive Scheme, the borrower being widow was entitled to lenient treatment and that she was making application for appropriate relief‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Borrower would make application for availing benefit of Incentive Scheme and on decision of said application if amount was still found due, the Authority would be allowed to proceed for execution of decree earlier passed by the Court in accordance with law and Executing Court would proceed in the execution after receiving the final decision on the application for grant of the benefit under the Prime Minister's Incentive Scheme‑‑‑Application would be filed by the borrower within 15 days which would be decided by the Authority within one month‑‑‑If no application was filed within the stipulated period, the Executing Court would proceed with the execution petition. Shamsher Iqbal for Appellant. Sardar Mehmood Iqbal Khakwani for Respondents. Date of hearing: 23rd June, 1999. Respondents applied for House Building Loan, which was allowed. Later the instalments were not paid which resulted in filing of a petition under section 30(10) of the House Building Finance Corporation Act, 1952. During pendency of the case, the learned Additional District Judge allowed payment of the amount due, in instalments with the observation that if two instalments would not be paid, the total amount will become due. Appellant applied for execution and also filed the present appeal to challenge the order of payment through instalments. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that without consent of the appellant, instalments could not have been allowed. In reply, it is submitted that respondents made certain payments after order of the Court and that under the Prime Minister's Incentive Scheme, the respondent No.1 being widow is entitled to lenient consideration. It is added that the respondents are applying for appropriate relief. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as and when the application is filed, the same will be dealt with on its own merits, according to the policy and law.

2. It appears that the respondents are claiming protection as a widow. The Government has given some incentive to adopt relaxing attitude towards the cases of widows. Respondent is making application for the appropriate relief. The statement filed in this Court also shows that some payments were made by the respondent, after order of the learned Additional District Judge. In this view of the matter, the proper course will be that the respondent shall make application for availing the benefit of the incentive given by the Government and on decision of the application, if the amount is still found due, the appellant would be allowed to proceed for execution of the decree, in accordance with law. The executing Court, will proceed in the execution after receiving the final decision on the application for grant of benefit under the Prime Minister's Incentive Scheme.

3. Application will be filed by the respondents within 15 days, which will be decided by the appellant within one month. If no application is filed within the stipulated period, the executing Court will proceed in the execution petition.

4. Disposed of in the above terms. H.B.T./H‑54/L Order accordingly.