Find a Lawyer

MAHBOOB AHMED versus CITIBANK

The Banking Court did not identify the issuance of courier service envelope to any court nor did it comply with the provisions of Sections 9 (5) 10, 12 and 22 of the Financial Institution (Retrieval of Finance) Ordinance 2001. Draw a result. Its unacceptable courier reported that the appellant was not present in Pakistan The connection of the bank that was submitted by the affidavit was canceled because an order was passed through the services attached by the banking court. Which did not provide the modes of service provided under the Financial Institutions (Financial Institutions) Ordinance. Services were not added to Sticky in 2001. The Banking Court could have passed an order for the appellant to work with the appellant in another way, which is not the case in the present case, in which the banking court quoted in the daily newspaper on which good service was served on the appellant. Used to be On the basis that it was stated that the newspaper is read by the Pakistani community in the United States, the reference was not lost. The proper service was launched because the appellant was able to establish in the court with copies of his passport that the reference was made. He was not in Pakistan at the time. The High Court had accepted the appeal keeping the ex parte decree and gave the appellant ten days to file the petition. Leave to appear and defend before the Banking Court how to become a advocate from Blitang lawyer