Find a Lawyer

IMTIAZ AHMAD versus PLATINUM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED

Sections 10, 15 and 21 of the Contract Act (IX of 1872), Sections 127 and 144, the dismissal of the petition for defense of the appellant after the personal bail executed in support of the bank and the acknowledgment of his signature on the personal guarantee of the Memorandum of Title Dam. After the decree to recover the loan amount, he signed documents that he used as an employee to obtain a home loan from his bank. And that if personal bail was not accepted in connection with the House Loan, it was enforceable against section 144 of the Contract Act, 1872, which did not approve the application for legal bail. Nor did the bank apply for such a loan approval order after the original contract guarantee and deposit would take place: the loan guarantee and the guarantee obtained through the third party's obligations obtained by the appellant. Before this, he could not be guaranteed, so, he had no chance of compliance with the guarantee so that he could secure his return. The bank appellant's own financial responsibility was the assistant vice president of the bank and he did not have a general guarantee whose personal guarantee was not legally guaranteed. Yes, the banking court rightly excluded the leave. The High Court dismissed the appeal lawer from fb area from Khuzdar lawyer