Find a Lawyer

UNITED BANK LIMITED versus MIAN AHMAD HASSAN

Recovery of Section 9 Compensation The plaintiff in the Prosecution Banking Court complained that she did not guarantee advanced credit to the third party and that she was maliciously imposed to recover the bank loan, on any document And witnesses were not signed. In their cross-examination it was admitted that the plaintiff had not signed any document in his presence, the banking court had raised by the bank to sue in favor of the plaintiff whether the plaintiff was a borrower or a consumer. No, and the matter was not born out of any financial agreement, the banking court had no jurisdiction in this matter which should be settled in the present case. The main question was whether the plaintiff was guaranteed or not. As a result there was a lender as stated in the banking rules, such a question to the banking court Had to do it and not The High Court refused to sign any of these documents or the other plaintiff of the court expressly denied any finding in the Banking Court finding that the plaintiff had never given bail in this case, the borrower also Had repaid his loan, filed a malpractice lawsuit against the plaintiff and the damages provided by the banking court were appropriate. top civil advocates from Neelam lawyer