Find a Lawyer

TAJ ZARAI INDUSTRIES versus HABIB BANK LIMITED

Banking Tribunals Ordinance 1984 Sections 2 (a), 6, 9 and 11 (4) include the General Clauses Act (X of 1897), Section 24A (as amended by the General Clauses (Amendment) Act (XI of 1997)). Financial Institutions (Recovery Finance) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001), order for recovery of loan amount with Section 5 unlawful damages, the appellants submitted a reply to the cause notice under section 6 (2) of the Bank Tribunals Ordinance 1984 An application has been made to delay filing such a response. The Banking Tribunal, which banned the search for such an answer, dismissed the trial without passing any order on the said application. Appellant appeared in the Banking Court after appearing for a notice issued for 1993, 1993, but instead of passing an order against the Banking Tribunal, demanding adjournment without filing a reply, Section 6 (4) of the Banking Tribunals Ordinance. The appellants wanted the case to be heard later on 4 199 1994. The delayed grievance, which was supported by an affidavit, was not sought by the bank for such a request, nor was the bank submitting its counter-affidavit contradicting the contents of the petition filed by the appellant. , Which was ruled by the Banking Court without the decision of the petition, would be deemed to have been unable to recover the debited amount in the pending bank appellant's account as the bank account which was the main purpose of the bank's case. Not taking into account the statement of the bank, the banking court had moved the case to dismiss the sketch. Oops, slip and was devoid of the reasons why it was not a speaking order and forensics famous lower court advocate from Patoki lawyer