P L D 1994 Karachi 258 (PLP)
| Citation | P L D 1994 Karachi 258 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | ‑‑‑‑Ss. 6(4), 13(a) & 2(f) as amended by Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Act (XVH of 1992)‑‑‑Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1983), Preamble‑‑‑Jurisdiction of Special Court (Banking) enhanced to hear cases where amount of loan did not exceed ten million rupees‑‑‑High Court, in consequence of such amendment, whether continued to have jurisdiction in cases where amount of loan was below ten million rupees and which were pending when amendment came into force‑‑‑Cases which were pending in High Court at the commencement of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, would continue to be heard and decided by High Court‑‑‑Effect of amendment of S.2(f), Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, was that cases filed in High Court after promulgation of the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans; Ordinance, 1979 but before promulgation of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1983 would now be transferred to the Special Court (Banking)‑‑‑Cases filed in High Court and received by High Court on transfer after promulgation of Amending Ordinance II of 1983 and before the enactment of Amending Act XVII of 1992, such of those cases it which amount of loan did not exceed ten million rupees would be transferred to Special Court (Banking)‑‑‑Where amount of loan exceeded ten million rupees, those cases would continue to be tried by High Court.‑‑Interpretation of statutes. |
| Bench Members | GH. Malik, J |
| Parties |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1994 Karachi 258 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1994 Karachi 258 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the ‑‑‑‑Ss. 6(4), 13(a) & 2(f) as amended by Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Act (XVH of 1992)‑‑‑Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1983), Preamble‑‑‑Jurisdiction of Special Court (Banking) enhanced to hear cases where amount of loan did not exceed ten million rupees‑‑‑High Court, in consequence of such amendment, whether continued to have jurisdiction in cases where amount of loan was below ten million rupees and which were pending when amendment came into force‑‑‑Cases which were pending in High Court at the commencement of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, would continue to be heard and decided by High Court‑‑‑Effect of amendment of S.2(f), Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, was that cases filed in High Court after promulgation of the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans; Ordinance, 1979 but before promulgation of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1983 would now be transferred to the Special Court (Banking)‑‑‑Cases filed in High Court and received by High Court on transfer after promulgation of Amending Ordinance II of 1983 and before the enactment of Amending Act XVII of 1992, such of those cases it which amount of loan did not exceed ten million rupees would be transferred to Special Court (Banking)‑‑‑Where amount of loan exceeded ten million rupees, those cases would continue to be tried by High Court.‑‑Interpretation of statutes. bench comprising: GH. Malik, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1994 Karachi 258 (PLP) (). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance.(XIX of 1979)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 6(4), 13(a) & 2(f) [as amended by Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Act (XVH of 1992)]‑‑‑Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1983), Preamble‑‑‑Jurisdiction of Special Court (Banking) enhanced to hear cases where amount of loan did not exceed ten million rupees‑‑‑High Court, in consequence of such amendment, whether continued to have jurisdiction in cases where amount of loan was below ten million rupees and which were pending when amendment came into force‑‑‑Cases which were pending in High Court at the commencement of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, would continue to be heard and decided by High Court‑‑‑Effect of amendment of S.2(f), Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) Ordinance, 1979, was that cases filed in High Court after promulgation of the Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans; Ordinance, 1979 but before promulgation of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1983 would now be transferred to the Special Court (Banking)‑‑‑Cases filed in High Court and received by High Court on transfer after promulgation of Amending Ordinance II of 1983 and before the enactment of Amending Act XVII of 1992, such of those cases it which amount of loan did not exceed ten million rupees would be transferred to Special Court (Banking)‑‑‑Where amount of loan exceeded ten million rupees, those cases would continue to be tried by High Court.‑‑[Interpretation of statutes]. Yasmeen Nighat v. National Bank of Pakistan PLD 1988 SC 391 ref. (b) Interpretation of statutes‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑ Retrospective or retroactive law is one which takes away or impairs vested rights acquired under existing laws, or creates new obligations or imposes no duties or attaches new disabilities in respect of transactions already past‑ Before a statute is to be construed as retrospective; its language must imperatively and clearly require such construction.. National Bank of Pakistan v. Bawany Industries Ltd. PLD 1983 Kai 300 and United Bank Ltd. v. Mst. Rehana Raza PLD 1983 Kar. 467 ref. Crawford on Statutory Construction, 1940 Edn., p. 109 and Maxwenn Interpretation of Statutes, 12th Edn., p.215 rel. (c) Interpretation of statutes‑ ‑‑‑‑ Retrospective construction‑‑‑Presumption against retrospective construction‑‑‑Purpose or object of presumption is to protect the vested or existing rights and where no one has any vested right in procedure, presumption against retrospective construction would have no application to enactments which affect only the procedure and practice of Courts‑‑‑Statute which relates solely to matters of procedure or legal remedy without affecting any substantive right may, in the absence of any legislative intent apply to pending proceedings‑‑‑Such a statute, however, may not be given retrospective effect if it would result in inconvenience or injustice. Nabi Ahmed v. Secretary, Government of West Pakistan PLD 1969 SC 599 and Adnan Afzal v. Sher Afzal PLD 1.969 SC 187 rel. Mamnoqn Hasan, I.I. Chundrigar, Kabiruddin, A. Latif Shakoor, A.R. Akhtar, Abbas Ahmed, Farooq H. Naek, Nural Hasan and Mansoorul Arfin, Advocates.
Judgment & Decree
359 230/73 103 546 176 431 593 104 557 566 566 a/w 596 106 561 719 1736/73 607 175 879 772 567 a/w 699 288 904 1982 2198/73 706 289 924 122 568 a/w 851 343 1107 406 771/73 853 344 1116 407 569 a/w 1004 346 1981 Ex.12/1982 2197/72 1980 357 10 570 a/w 15 392 58 2199/72 16 454 69 (C) WHICH WERE INSTITUTED OR RECEIVED ON TRANSFER FROM SPECIAL. COURT AFTER ORDINANCE II OF 1983 WAS PROMULGATED 1983 1983 1983 1983 1983 132 242 352 384 a/w 788/81 133 243 353 406 428 148 272 358 391 a/w 465 149 280 360 109/79 467 187 290 367 415 a/w 491 190 313 380 367/81 563 231 343 381 423 567 232 344 382 425 a/w 643 1983 1985 1985 1986 1987 666 84 a /w 595 663 668 671 689/84 603 746 778 691 690/84 615 758 779 1984 85 713 Ex.07 789 J.M.12 a/w 86 a/w 724 Ex.72 797 49/75 5138/84 729 Ex.105 827 20/75 134 817 1987 890 Suit 675/81 149 876 20 911 37 150 931 to 975 65 9213 202 273 986 111 Ex.No.11 297 3119 989 160 a/w Ex.Ho.34 339 326 Ex.14 161 Ex.No.101 351 341 1986 1168 a/w 1988 365 369 19 169 79 367 440 58 240 91 501 a/w 457 59 260 142 J.MM52/88 477 a/w 180 340 251 508 625 183 365 a/w 342 513 859 195 308 584 519 478 221 706 594 528 519 a/w 228 841 595 595 528 345 420 640 784 520 502 490 657 1984 535 556 491 658 Ex01 536 575 544 675 Ex.47 548 614 606 758 573 629 649 J.M.44 a/w 1988 1989 1989 1990 S.No.290/83 570 12111 854 824 617 1211 959 896 700 1300 1007 102 761 1301 1008 1038 804 1367 1014 1040 806 1377 1029 1989 810 1433 1073 49 965 Ex.32 1990. 50 966 Ex.63 Execution Appeals. 87 972 Ex.104 3 150 985 Ex.109 17 167 991 1990 23 196 918 J.M.68 a/w 34 220 1002 s.N o.342 40 236 1003 77 41 318 1064 110 46 351 a/w 1065 198 58 J.M.47 1073 289 72 361 1076 366 83 364 1079 396 91 433 1102 434 93 448 1105 475 100 469 1107 598 104 493 1115 634 124 501 1130 704 139 502 1182 705 564 1205 773 1991 1991 1992 111 ExApplns. Ex. Applns 185 103 8 857 112 28 858 1992 44 859 03 52 965 15 54 1027 57 66 1057 119 68 1069 180 88 1077 183 1993 1088 258 Ex. Applns 1133 299 5 1135 323 10 1137 324 18 1255 325 1991 331 ExApplns 342 47 344 13 378 28 474 41 486 55 487 57 495 62 510 67 1992 68 Ex. Applns 99 4