NAJAM-US-SAQIB versus MESSRS ALLIED BANK OF PAKISTAN LTD.
Section 10 and 22 Appeal to the High Court was merely that the banking court discriminated against appellant / guarantor in refusing leave to defend the case when leave was granted in similar circumstances when the defendant / bank too. When the criminal proceedings were initiated, the legal responsibility was civil responsibility and the criminal responsibility was separate and separate, and each matter had to be dealt with on its own facts and circumstances, in the present case it would be guaranteed execution, not dispute. There was no contentious point of fact and law was raised by the appellant, the banking court rightly rejected. I have not decided. In order to defend this case, the vacation application was rejected and the bank passed the order
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
jobs for fresh advocates from Dina lawyer
