2006 PLP 183 (CLD)

MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J.

Present appeal proceeds against order dated 12-7-2002, whereby the learned Judge Banking Court dismissed appellant's application filed under section 151, C.P.C.

2. Pursuant to the passing of decree for recovery of Rs.24,45,569 together with costs and mark up, by the learned Judge Banking Court, against the appellant, vide judgment and decree dated 26-4-1998, the respondent/decree holder filed the execution petition. It has been alleged that during the pendency of the execution proceedings, the respondent offered to settle the liability under the Incentive Scheme; consequent thereto the appellant, statedly, paid a sum of Rs. 14,61,024, including the total value of the shares amounting to Rs.8,00,000, to the decree holder bank and then it requested the respondent, through letter, that the balance amount of Rs.42,873, be accepted in full satisfaction of the decree, but the said letter was not responded. The appellant filed the application under section 151, C.P.C., before the learned Executing Court, with the prayer that it be allowed to deposit the remaining amount of Rs.42,873, under the Incentive Scheme, in full satisfaction of the decree, which application was opposed by the respondent, and the learned Judge Banking Court dismissed the said application, vide impugned order dated 12-7-2002, hence the present appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant, while reiterating the contents of application under section 151, C.P.C. and placing on record letter dated 19-4-2005, has stated that appellant's case falls under the Incentive Scheme, therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable in law. Conversely, the learned counsel for the respondent has opposed this appeal and submitted that the case of the appellant is not covered under the Incentive Scheme and that huge amount is outstanding against it.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and examined the available record, including the impugned order. We find that the learned Judge Banking Court, although in the order under appeal, has narrated the contents of appellant's application under section 151, C.P.C. and stance of the respondent-Bank, yet it failed to give its own findings except to state that offer, made by the appellant, vide letter dated A 29-4-2002, was not acceptable to the decree holder. The said order is perfunctory, devoid of reasons and shows complete non-application of judicial mind. The impugned order is not inconsonance with the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases reported as Adamjee Jute Mills Ltd. v. The Province of-East Pakistan and others PLD 1959 SC (Pak.) 272; Gouranga Mohan Sikdar v. The Controller Import and Export and 2 others PLD 1970 SC 158; Mollah Ejahar All v. Government of East Pakistan and others PLD 1970 SC 173 and Muhammad Ibrahim Khan v. Secretary, Ministry of Labour and others 1984 SCMR 1014, wherein it has been held that the "judicial orders" must be supported by reasons. Even it has been enjoined upon an executive authority, as per section 24(A) of General Clauses Act, 1897 (inserted by General Clauses (Amendment Act, 1997, Act No.XI of 1997)) to give reasons for making the order.

5. Additionally, letter dated 19-4-2005, produced by the learned counsel for the appellant, today, obviously, was not before the learned Judge Banking Court, when the impugned order was rendered. We feel that the said letter has a substantial bearing on the fate of the case. In view whereof, we are inclined to remand the case to the learned Judge Banking Court, with the directions to decide appellant's application, afresh, in accordance with the record of the case and after taking into consideration contents of letter dated 19-4-2005.

6. In the above perspective, present appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 12-7-2002 is set aside with no order as to costs. Resultantly, appellant's application under section 151, C.P.C. shall be deemed to be pending before the learned Judge Banking Court, who shall decide the same, afresh, in view of correspondence exchanged between the parties and letter dated 19-4-2005, which shall be placed on record of the learned Judge Banking Court by the appellant on the date given below. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Judge Banking Court on 21-11-2005. M.H./F-134/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Case remanded.