Find a Lawyer

SYED RASHID HUSSAIN versus BANK OF PUNJAB THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR

The leave application for defending the suit for the recovery of sections 10 and 21 debt was dismissed for non-prosecution, and at the same time the decree was passed in favor of the bank that the defendant filed an appeal. No, but moved the request to keep the former party separate. Order on the basis that the date was erroneously noted as 14 10 1998 instead of 24 9 1998. In addition to the plea, defendant's lawyer's affidavit was also filed by the Banking Court, dismissing the plea that the date was not an affidavit of facts even if that date was wrongly noted. Or was there a question of truth. There was no doubt in the court's mind that the applicant's request was not fully substantiated from the available record, even, because of the affidavit of the said effect, allowing the court to present it to the parties. Should have One of the reasons for the submission of leave and the defense of the application for defense, along with the affidavit of this lawyer, which was not positively contradicted by the bank, considering the contents of the application, by the appellant and his The petition for that was submitted should have been allowed by the High Court; in the circumstances, the appeal allowed, the appellant's order of dismissal of the petitioner's leave to defend the illegal prosecution case, As a result, the previous banking court order was also settled and the applicant's application should be considered pending before the banking court. Which will be decided according to the law. solicitors from Musafir Khana lawyer