2002 PLP 622 (CLD)
Chief Executive and 6 others‑‑‑Appellants Versus INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF
| Citation | 2002 PLP 622 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Jawwad S. Khawaja and Abdul Shakoor Paracha, JJ |
| Parties | Chief Executive and 6 others‑‑‑Appellants Versus INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 622 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 622 (CLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Jawwad S. Khawaja and Abdul Shakoor Paracha, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 622 (CLD) (Chief Executive and 6 others‑‑‑Appellants Versus INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Farooq Mahmood Khokhar for Appellant No.1.
- Sultan Mahmood for Respondent No.1.
- Date of hearing: 23rd January, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997)‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 18 & 21‑‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. X36, Rr.66, 67 & 90‑‑‑Execution of decree‑‑‑Appellants filed objection petition under O. Off, Rr.66,67 & 90 for setting aside the auction of property‑‑‑Executing Court directed appellants to deposit 2096 of auction price within one month‑‑ Appellants failed to comply with such order even within the extended time, thus, objection petition was dismissed‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Order dismissing objection petition was not open to exception in such circumstances‑‑‑Appeal was dismissed being without merits. Khalid Saleem and Adil Aqil Mirza for the Auction Purchasers.
Judgment & Decree
Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997)‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 18 & 21‑‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. X36, Rr.66, 67 & 90‑‑‑Execution of decree‑‑‑Appellants filed objection petition under O. Off, Rr.66,67 & 90 for setting aside the auction of property‑‑‑Executing Court directed appellants to deposit 2096 of auction price within one month‑‑ Appellants failed to comply with such order even within the extended time, thus, objection petition was dismissed‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Order dismissing objection petition was not open to exception in such circumstances‑‑‑Appeal was dismissed being without merits. Ch. Farooq Mahmood Khokhar for Appellant No.1. Sultan Mahmood for Respondent No.1. Khalid Saleem and Adil Aqil Mirza for the Auction Purchasers. Date of hearing: 23rd January, 2002. JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.‑‑‑This appeal impugns the order, dated 30‑6‑2001 passed by the learned Banking Court No.II, Lahore. The facts of this case are very simple. The respondent‑Bank obtained a decree against the appellants, dated 14‑11‑2000 from Banking Court No.II, Lahore. In execution of the said decree the property, which is subject matter of the present appeal, was put to auction on 17‑5‑2001. At the said auction the property was purchased by the auction purchaser respondent No.2. The appellants filed an objection petition under Order XXI, rules 66, 67 and 90, C.P.C. for setting aside the auction. The learned executing Court required the appellants to deposit 20% of the auction price in Court within a period of one month. This order was not complied with. Instead an extension of time was applied for. The learned Banking Court extended the period for deposit of the amount by one week. This also was not complied with. In the circumstances, the objection petition filed by the appellants was dismissed.
2. We find that the order dismissing the objection petition of the appellants is not open to exception considering the facts narrated above. In this view of the matter, this appeal being without merit is dismissed. S.A.K./R‑107/L Appeal dismissed.