KHALIDA ADEEB KHANAM versus MESSRS PRUDENTIAL INVESTMENT BANK LTD.
Banking Companies (Debt, Progress, Credit and Recovery of Financial Issues) Appellant's claim of section 14 and 21 of the Ordinance 1997, claiming that the mortgage of the controversial plot in favor of Bank Axis was not valid, and that It was a clear buyer for valuable consideration. The banking court rejected the request for objection, after recording the evidence, prior to the suspicion, that Waldetti Bank claimed that its original allotment was made through a request for transfer of the controversial plot allotment. The petition, signed by him, is a mortgage of a controversial plot based on two documents. It was obtained by Marguerite, which turned out to be a fake document because it was not part of the Capital Development Authority's record. And a copy of the letter sending the original altease, which did not have any signature of the Capital Development Authority, did not result in the creation of a mortgage in favor of the bank, both records show Appellant was not a good buyer for it. Controversial plot Appellate Court accepts the appeal and accordingly allows the application of the objection
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
