2013 PLP 2230 (CLD)

SHOAIB SAEED, J.

This R.F.A. under section 22 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 is directed against the judgment and decree dated 12-5-2008 passed by the Judge Banking Court-I, Multan.

2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1 filed a suit for declaration to the effect that his agricultural land measuring 28 kanal, 1 Marlas compromised in Khata No.25 situated in Mauza Khichi Wala, Tehsil Kehrar Pacca, District Lodhran was free from all types of encumbrances and he neither got prepared any pass book nor obtained any loan with regard to case No.122869.The appellants were proceeded against ex parte on 18-2-2004 which order was set aside subject to payment of Rs.2,000 vide order dated 18-2-2006. However the appellants neither deposited cost nor appeared before the court, thereafter the appellants were again proceeded against ex parte. Respondent No.1 produced oral as well as documentary evidence Exh.P-1 to Exh.P-22. The learned Judge Banking Court vide impugned judgment dated 12-5-2008 decreed the suit of the plaintiff's-respondents, hence this appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the documentary evidence was not examined nor thoroughly perused or discussed. Respondent No.1 was to make out the case on his own strength which he failed to do so.

4. Conversely, it was argued that the appellants failed to rebut the oral as well as documentary evidence produced by respondent No.1, so the impugned judgment was just and proper in the circumstances.

5. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record with their assistance.

6. Perusal of the judgment and decree dated 12-5-2008 reveals that documentary evidence produced on record has neither been examined nor discussed. Mere reference of documents exhibited does not amount to minutely examining the same, every bit of evidence has to be discussed and on its basis judgment should be based, this exercise is lacking in the instant case. Notwithstanding the fact that nothing is in rebuttal from the appellants side but respondents on their own strength have to prove their case. In view of the foregoing reasons, the impugned judgment is set aside and the case is remanded to the learned Judge Banking Court No.1, Multan, who is directed to pass the judgment after discussing every bit of documentary evidence placed on record within two months from the date of receipt of this judgment. JJK/A-109/L Case remanded.