2007 PLP 1294 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD AMJAD MALIK — Petitioner Versus SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION through its Managing Director and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1294 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AMJAD MALIK — Petitioner Versus SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION through its Managing Director and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Small Business Finance Corporation Act (XXIX of 1972) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1294 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Small Business Finance Corporation Act (XXIX of 1972) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 1294 (MLD)?
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 1294 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD AMJAD MALIK — Petitioner Versus SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION through its Managing Director and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Tanvir Akhthr for Petitioner.
- Preshak for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 21
West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), Ss.81 & 82
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner, who was guarantor for the loan advanced to one of the respondents was arrested in pursuance of non-payment of dues by said respondent and was released on payment of Rs.100,000
While apprehending his arrest afresh, petitioner had filed constitutional petition
Main contention raised by petitioner was that he was arrested without any notice or giving any opportunity of hearing and without following the procedure as provided in S.21, of Small Business Finance Corporation Act, 1972 and also Ss.81 & 82 of West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967
Counsel for Corporation assured that in case, any action was taken in future against petitioner, said provisions of law would be strictly followed and adhered to--Corporation, in circumstances was directed to strictly follow the law before taking any action against the petitioner.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.
The petitioner is allegedly a guarantor for the loan advanced to respondent No.3 by Small Business Finance Corporation, he was arrested in pursuance to the non-payment of the dues by the said respondent he was released on the payment of Rs.100,
000. Thereafter, while apprehending his arrest afresh, he came to this Court through the present petition.
2. Main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was arrested without any notice or giving any opportunity of hearing and without following the procedure as provided in section 21 of the Small Business Finance Corporation Act, 1972, as also sections 81 and 82 of the Land Revenue Act.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents assures that in case if any action is taken in future, against the petitioner, the above provisions of law shall be strictly followed and adhered to.
4. In the light of above, respondents are directed to strictly follow the law before taking any action against the petitioner. Disposed of. H.B.T./M-242/L Order accordingly.