Find a Lawyer

UNITED BANK LIMITED versus KASHIR TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED

Sections 3 and 9 of the Contract Act (IX of 1872), section 23 suit for the recovery of a non-interest-bearing finance bank that is a financial institution for claims over a period after a unanimous agreement based on the plaintiff's payment of the same premium. Can't deal Markup on a banking business or markup basis after 20 6 on 1984 on interest based system, except in case of foreign loan if the lender under non interest based system returns the purchase price of the goods only for the contract period. But then the defendants did not have such contract was illegal and was affected by Section 23 of the Contract Act, 1872, so after a unanimous period the bank was not entitled to any recovery. \ n

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013

• MUHAMAMD FAYYAZ v. State 2013 YLR 1318
• JAMEEL AHMAD v. HOME SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE 2013 PCrLJ 1322
• AYAZ AMIR v. RETURNING OFFICER FOR NA-60, CHAKWAL 2013 CLC 1323
• Mst. NOOR BEGUM v. MUHAMMAD AKRAM 2013 MLD 1323
• BILAL ENTERPRISES v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Revenue Division, Islamabad 2013 PTD 1332
• KARIM BAKHSH v. MITHOO KHAN 2013 YLR 1334
• NAEEM alias DEEMI v. State 2013 PCrLJ 1335
• KHALID SALEEM alias KHALDI v. State 2013 YLR 1340

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2013 →

attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Kakul lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes