2008 PLP 427 (CLD)
RUSTAM KHAN — Appellant Versus ZARI TARIQIATI BANK LIMITED through Manager — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 427 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | RUSTAM KHAN — Appellant Versus ZARI TARIQIATI BANK LIMITED through Manager — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 427 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 427 (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: 2008 PLP 427 (CLD) (RUSTAM KHAN — Appellant Versus ZARI TARIQIATI BANK LIMITED through Manager — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss.9, 10 & 22
Suit for rendition of accounts
Plaintiff had assailed order/decree passed by the Banking Court, whereby his suit for rendition of accounts was dismissed
Contents of the order reflected that defendant filed an. application for leave to defend the suit, but thereafter failed to appear
Contents of the order were not clear as to whether leave was granted or not, or even if the leave application was considered
Section 10(8) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, mandated the Banking Court to consider the contents of the plaint, application for leave to defend and reply thereto
Such having not been done, mandatory requirements of law were not fulfilled-Allowing appeal, impugned order and decree were set aside by the High Court
Banking Court would decide leave application as required by law and thereafter, if leave was granted, it would proceed to follow the procedure as contained in S.10(10) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001.
Judgment & Decree
SYED ASGHAR HAIDER, J.
Through this appeal the appellant assails the order/decree dated 11-2006, passed by the Banking Court-III, Lahore, whereby his suit for rendition of accounts etc. was dismissed. The appellant was sanctioned a loan of Rs.2,22,500 (Rupees two lac twenty two thousand and five hundred only) by the respondent-Bank. According to the appellant the respondent-Bank issued him a notice for recovery of Rs.2,94,449 (Rupees two lac ninety four thousand four hundred and forty nine only) although he had liquidated the liability interest, etc. He requested for issuance of clearance certificate by the Bank, which request was declined. Therefore, he filed a suit for rendition of accounts, declaration etc. The respondent-Bank contested the suit by filing PLA. The appellant filed replication thereto. The learned trial Court after hearing the arguments, dismissed the suit.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Banking Court had no powers in law to dismiss the suit without framing issues and recording evidence, as postulated by section 10(10) of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001. The appellant had raised fundamental questions of law and facts, therefore, the trial Court was bound to record evidence. Even otherwise the impugned order/decree is based on assumptions; reference is made to record, to which the appellant had no access, nor was provided any opportunity to question its veracity or otherwise.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.
5. Contents of the order reflect that the defendant filed an application for leave to defend the suit but thereafter failed to appear. 'It is, however, not clear from the contents of the order as to whether leave was granted or not, or even if the leave application was considered. Section 10(8) of the Ordinance XLVI mandates the Banking Court to consider the contents of the plaint, the application for leave to defend and the reply thereto. This was not done. Thus mandatory requirements of law were not fulfilled. Therefore, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order and decree is set aside. The Banking Court shall decide the leave application as required by law and thereafter if leave is granted, it will proceed to follow the procedure as contained in section 10(10) of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001. H.B.T./R-4/L Appeal allowed.