2002 PLP 301 (CLD)
McLEOD ROAD, BRANCH, LAHORE‑‑‑Appellant Versus Messrs LUCKY AUTOS AND RICKSHAW EXCHANGE,
| Citation | 2002 PLP 301 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Jawwad S. Khawaja and Muhammad Sair Ali, JJ |
| Parties | McLEOD ROAD, BRANCH, LAHORE‑‑‑Appellant Versus Messrs LUCKY AUTOS AND RICKSHAW EXCHANGE, |
| Primary Law | Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordnance (XLY of 1979)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 301 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordnance (XLY of 1979)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 301 (CLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Jawwad S. Khawaja and Muhammad Sair Ali, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 301 (CLD) (McLEOD ROAD, BRANCH, LAHORE‑‑‑Appellant Versus Messrs LUCKY AUTOS AND RICKSHAW EXCHANGE,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zaheer Ahmad Saeed for Appellant.
- Khashnood Akhtar Raja for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 19th November, 2001.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Ss. 2 & 6‑‑‑Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1983), Ss. 2, 4 & 5‑‑‑Execution of decree passed by Civil Court during the period between the date of promulgation of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1983) and 17-4-1988 i.e. the date of judgment of Supreme Court passed in Yasmeen Nighat's case (PLD 1988 SC 391) settling the law qua absence of jurisdiction in Civil Courts as to suits for recovery of Bank loans valuing Rs.1,00,000 or below‑‑‑Special Banking Court dismissed the Bank application for execution of such decree holding same as void‑‑‑Contention of the Bank was that decree passed by Civil Court prior to judgment of Supreme Court had become final by non‑filing of appeal by respondents, and thus, had assumed character of "past and closed transaction"‑‑‑ Validity‑‑ Judgment and decree so passed by Civil Court being a judgment in personam, had become "final" in absence of challenge arid was thin "a past and closed transaction"‑‑ Special Banking Court had exceeded its jurisdiction by dismissing execution application of the Bank‑‑‑Appellate Court accepted the appeal and set aside the impugned order as a result of which, execution petition filed by the Bank would be deemed to be pending before Banking Court, who would decide same in accordance with law. Mst. Yasmeen Nighat v. National Bank of Pakistan PLD 1988 SC 391; F.A.0. 269 of 1994 and F.A.0. 261 of 1993 ref.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD SAIR ALI, J.‑‑‑Upon appellant‑Bank's suit for recovery of money, decree was passed by the learned Civil Judge in favour of the appellant‑Bank. This decree was passed during the period between the date of promulgation of Ordinance Il of 1983 and 17‑4‑1988 i.e. the date of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mst. Yasmeen Nighat v. National Bank of Pakistan PLD 1988 SC 391 settling the law qua absence of jurisdiction in the Civil Courts as to suits for recovery of Bank loans valuing Rs. 1,00,000 or below. To seek execution of above said decree, the appellant
Bank filed execution petition in the Special Banking Court, Lahore. The learned Presiding officer dismissed this execution petition holding the decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, as void purportedly on the basis of law laid down in the above referred judgment. The appellant‑Bank has assailed the said order in this appeal on the ground that decree passed by the learned Civil Court, prior to judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, had become final by non‑filing of appeal by respondents thereby assuming character of "past and closed transaction".
3. This question was considered and decided by a learned Division Bench of this Court in judgment dated 25‑4‑2001 rendered in F.A.O. 269 of 1994, holding that judgment and decree so passed by the Civil Court, being a judgment in personam, became "final" in absence of challenge and is thus "a past and closed 'transaction" and that the learned Special Banking Court exceeded its jurisdiction by dismissing the execution application of the decree holder‑Bank.
4. This judgment was also followed in F.A.O. 261 of 1993 decided on 9‑10‑2001 by another learned Division Bench of this Court of which one of us was a Member.
5. Adhering to the rule of consistency and respectfully agreeing with above judgments, we accept this appeal. The impugned order passed by learned Presiding Officer, Special Banking Court, Lahore dismissing appellant's execution petition is set aside. Resultantly, execution petition filed by the appellant‑Bank shall be deemed to be pending, now before the learned Banking Court who shall proceed with and decide the same in accordance with law. There shall, however, be no orders to costs. S.A.K./M.A.K./A‑366/L Case decided.