2010 PLP 802 (CLD)

On behalf of the respondents Nos.2, 3 and 4 powers have been filed which are taken on record whereas on behalf of respondent No. 1 a written statement has been filed which too is taken on record. Controversy relates to the fact that the petitioner has availed Credit Card Facility from the respondents Nos.2 and 3 on the basis of his employment in the private organization. He had availed and utilized credit card facility and repaid the amount being good customer. On account of uncalled for circumstances he could not repay the money to the respondents Nos.2 and 3, the staff members of the respondents Nos.2 to 5 continuously visited his house and the petitioner and his family members were harassed. On account of the finance facility availed by the petitioner as well as the function discontinued by respondents Nos.2 and 3 after checking his record for repayment, credit card facilities were terminated and the benefits were stopped. It is urged that the respondents Nos.2 to 5 through their staff in collusion with respondent No.1 had illegally acted to pressurize the petitioner and his family to repay the outstanding amount arising out of credit card facility and had acted in utter disregard to the .provisions of Banking Law by resorting to take law in their hands and compelling the petitioner and his family to repay the amount by way of use of force thereby the petitioner and his family is disreputed, humiliated and insulted in the eye of general public. After the filing of the peti34on the respondents Nos.2 to 5 on 2nd April, 2008 were restrained from taking any coercive action against the petitioner and his family members. After service of the notice Mr. M.A. Khan learned counsel for respondents Nos.2 and 4 and Mr. Neel Keshav learned counsel for respondent No.3 have appeared and contended that the respondents Nos.2 and 3 would resort the forum available under the law and no coercive measures would be used for recovery of the outstanding amount on account of the credit card facility available to the petitioner. This being the position Mr. Nadeem Ahmed learned counsel holding brief for Mr. Gohar Iqbal seems to be satisfied therefore, the petition hereby stands disposed of with the direction to the respondents Nos.2 to 5 to approach the competent forum for redress available under civil and criminal jurisdiction. Orders accordingly. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. H.B.T./A-43/K Order accordingly.