2007 PLP 332 (CLD)
MUHAMMAD YASIN — Appellant Versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN through Manager and another-Respondents
| Citation | 2007 PLP 332 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YASIN — Appellant Versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN through Manager and another-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 332 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 332 (CLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 332 (CLD) (MUHAMMAD YASIN — Appellant Versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN through Manager and another-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abid Nazir Sial for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 9, 10 & 22
Application for grant of leave to defend
Appellant and his mother were proceeded against ex parte and ex parte decree was passed against appellant and application filed by appellant for setting aside ex parte decree was dismissed by Banking Court
Appellant, had contended that, though address of appellant was given correctly in the plaint, but it came to be recorded wrongly in the process issued by Banking Court and that, in circumstances there was no due service in law and in fact
Name of Block of residential area was stated as "USMA", in the plaint whereas in the process, it was mentioned as "UZMA"; it could not be said, in circumstances that appellant was duly served
Allowing appeal, impugned order and ex parte decree were set aside by High Court
Appellant could file application for grant of leave to defend in terms of S.10 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, within specified period.
Judgment & Decree
MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ, J.
In a suit filed by the respondent-Bank against the appellant and his mother on 24-3-2006, they were proceeded against ex parte and a decree was passed on 19-6-2006. On 10-7-2006 an application was filed for setting aside of the said ex parte decree. This application has been dismissed by a learned Judge, Banking Court-I, Lahore, on 12-9-2006.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that although address of the appellant was given correctly in the plaint, it came to be recorded wrongly in the process issued by the learned Banking Court and as such there was no due service in law and, in fact.
3. We have gone through the trial Court records. We do find that whereas in the plaint, in the address which pertains to a residential area of Lahore, the name of Block was stated as "USAMA" whereas in the process it was mentioned as "UZMA". The report of the process through Bailiff is that none of the defendants were found at the address but Muhammad Ismail stated to be the father and husband met him but he refused to receive the notice. The courier service reported that the address is incorrect and the documents could not be delivered. On the same address, the report on the postal envelope is of refusal. In the Urdu publication, the same incorrect address is there. However, it is correct in the English publication.
4. Having, thus, gone through the records, we do find that it cannot be said that the appellant was duly served. The FAO is accordingly allowed and the impugned order dated 12-9-2006 is set aside. We also set aside the said ex parte decree dated 19-6-2006. The appellant shall file an application for grant of leave to defend in terms of section 10 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 within 10 days from today while the parties will put in appearance before the learned Judge, Banking Court No. 1, Lahore, on 30-1-2007. No orders as to costs. H.B.T./M-753/L Appeal allowed.