2002 PLP 1288 (CLD)
ASIM SHAHZAD‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED through President and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1288 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Jawwad S. Khawaja and Abdul Shakoor Paracha, JJ |
| Parties | ASIM SHAHZAD‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED through President and another‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1288 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1288 (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 1288 (CLD) (ASIM SHAHZAD‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED through President and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Azmatullah Chaudhry for Appellant.
- Wasim Majid Malik for Respondents,
- Date of hearing: 23rd April, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.12‑‑‑Ex parte decree, setting aside of‑‑‑Service on wrong address‑‑‑Plaint filed by the Bank gave two addresses, of the borrower‑‑‑Both the addresses were not the ones which were given by the borrower in loan agreement‑‑‑Process was served on the addresses given in the plaint‑‑‑Borrower did not appear before the Banking Court and the suit was decreed ex parte‑‑‑Application to set aside the ex parte decree was filed by the borrower which was dismissed by the Banking Court‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Where the addresses given in the plaint could not be taken to be the addresses for sufficient service on the borrower, the Banking Court wrongly dismissed the application‑‑‑High Court set aside the ex parte judgment and decree passed by the Banking Court, allowed the borrower to file application for leave to appear and defend the suit and remanded the case to Banking Court for decision afresh‑‑‑Appeal was allowed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.‑After going through the record, it is apparent that the appellant' had entered into an agreement with Diners Club Card, International for the financial facility, in respect of which the present proceedings arise. The address of the appellant given in the said agreement was 48‑C, Commercial Zone, Liberty Market, Gulberg‑III, Lahore. Thereafter it appears, the respondent‑Bank took over the business of Diners Club.
2. The plaint filed by the respondent‑Bank gives two addresses of the appellant‑defendant, one being 148‑Sikandar Block, Allama Iqbal Town, Lahore, and the other as 18‑C, Commercial Zone, Liberty Market, Gulberg‑III, Lahore. Both the addresses are not those which were given by the appellant‑defendant in the above referred agreement. In this view of the matter, any service purportedly effected at the addresses given in the plaint, could not be taken to be sufficient service on the appellant.
3. On the above basis, it is clear that the application moved by the appellant seeking setting aside of the impugned judgment and decree was wrongly dismissed. We, therefore, allow the said application and set aside the impugned judgment and decree. dated 4‑7‑2001. In the circumstances, the appellant shall be entitled to submit an application seeking leave to appear and defend before the learned Banking Court w1thin 21 days from today. Since both the parties are represented, they are directed to appear before the learned Banking Court on 27‑4‑2002. This appeal is allowed in the above, terms. Q.M.H./M.A.K./A‑480/L Case remanded.