AHMAD MURAD MALIK versus PRESIDING OFFICER, BANKING COURT
Sections 4, 9 (3) (4) and 10 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Section 141 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution Petition Against Bank Banking Court, After the Plaintiff's Notice, Notice to the Plaintiff Bank In his service, he was directed to file a statement of accounts, according to which the banking court heard the parties' arguments and settled the case and decided in favor of the plaintiff that the procedure adopted by the banking court 9 (3) (4) was a violation. In the Banking Companies (Debt, Progress, Credit and Recovery of Financial Resources) Act, 1997, it was mandatory in nature to decide the suit for service of the summons and the suit filed under section 9 of the said Act, but the Banking Court The method was not adopted, but it did develop. Its own wisdom is separate from the provisions of the Act and even the CPC Banking Court established under section 4 of the Banking Companies (Debt, Advancement, Credit and Recovery of Financial Issues) Act. Under the procedure provided under the Act, 1997 was binding and could not be deferred, while a consumer or banking company, hearing the case filed before it by the High Court, accepted the constitutional request and in this case The entire proceedings by the Banking Court were declared illegal and without lawful authority
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
