2023 PLP 1464 (CLD)

ABID HUSSAIN CHATTHA, J.

This Appeal is directed against the impugned Order dated 23.11.2021 passed by the Civil Judge, Sahiwal, whereby, the suit for damages filed by the Appellant against the Respondent Bank was found to have been instituted without jurisdiction and in consequence thereof, the claim of the Appellant was held to fall within the jurisdiction of Banking Court constituted under the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 (the "Ordinance"). As such, the plaint was returned under Order VII, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that the suit did not fall within the jurisdiction of the Banking Court under the Ordinance since no Finance was extended by the Respondent Bank and as such, the Appellant did not fell in the definition of 'customer' as stipulated in the Ordinance.

3. Conversely, learned counsel for the Respondent Bank states that any breach of obligation by a 'customer' is required to be adjudicated by the Banking Court under the Ordinance.

4. The respective contentions of the parties have been considered in the light of the impugned Order. The plaint has also been duly perused. It is an admitted position that the Financial Facility requested by the Appellant did not culminate into contractual relationship through execution of Agreement of Financing and no amount was disbursed to the Appellant by the Respondent Bank. There is only an approval letter in compliance whereof, the Appellant has pleaded in the plaint to have taken certain steps resulting in financial loss to him. However, no Finance Agreement was executed between the parties and no Financial Facility was extended. In this background, the contents of the plaint primarily focus on non-disbursement of the Financial Facility and on account of losses suffered by the Appellant, seek damages from the Respondent Bank. The prayer clause of the suit is reproduced as under:- "It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that a decree for damages may very kindly be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants as the defendants have violated the prescribed rules, practices, laws of the defendant Bank as well as of State Bank of Pakistan by causing heavy monetary loss of business and irreparable loss to the reputation/health etc. to plaintiff; which comes to Rs. 499,267,000/- which is just and fair. Any other relief as deemed appropriate, by this Honourable Court, may also be granted."

5. In view of the above facts, it is manifestly clear that the suit was competently filed before the Civil Court of ordinary jurisdiction in view of the law laid down in the cases titled "Marahaba Pakistan International and others v. Habib Bank Limited and another" (2017 CLD 995) and "Ishfaq Ahmed and 5 others v. Habib Bank Limited and another" (2017 CLD 1639). It is settled law that the relationship of 'customer' with the Bank with reference to 'finance' is established only when the Agreement of financing is duly executed between the parties and the Finance Facility is duly disbursed, whereas, the aforesaid elements are lacking in the instant case. Hence, the Civil Court fell in error to hold that it does not have jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the suit on its own merits.

6. Accordingly, this Appeal is allowed; and the impugned Order dated 23.11.2021 is set aside. The parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 16.06.2022 along with a certified copy of this Order. The Trial Court shall proceed in accordance with law. MQ/H-13/L Appeal allowed.