Admission on reserved seat

After refusal of leave to appear in suit, Banking Court rejected the plaint for not filing statement of accounts as per provisions of S. 9(2) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001

contention of plaintiffs was that after dismissal of petition for leave to appear by Banking Court, suit of plaintiffs should have been decreed automatically

Validity

Contention of plaintiffs was not correct and Courts of law were under legal obligation to apply their mind and correct law, notwithstanding the fact that defendant in the suit had appeared or not before the Courts during proceedings

Statement of facts narrating accounts given in plaint and reflected in documents annexed with plaint was not a statement of account as visualized by the provisions of Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891, therefore, plaint in the suit was not supported by statement of accounts as per provisions of S.9 (2) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001

Plaint was rightly rejected by Banking Court

High Court declined to interfere in the order passed by Single Judge

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Defendants, absence of Plaintiff alleged that defendants were infringing his trade mark by using the same or other colour scheme, design and get up-Suit filed by plaintiff was verified on oath who had also filed his affidavit supported with certain documents in support of his claim

Defendants neither came forward to contest the claim of plaintiff though attempt to serve them was made twice first in year, 2005 and thereafter in the year, 2009, when the case was remanded in appeal but no one turned up to contest the suit-Effect-Contention of plaintiff had gone unrebutted and unchallenged

No material was placed on record as to damages suffered by plaintiff, therefore High Court declined to pass decree to the extent of damages

Suit was decreed accordingly.