Find a Lawyer

HABIB BANK LIMITED versus MESSRS FIVE STAR TRAVELS

Sections 22 and 24 (2) of the Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Arts 181 and 183 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), termination of the execution of section 48 decree Reasonable cause for recovery of bank loan suit on 27 11 1997 The order was granted and the execution request was filed on 18 2003 10 2003 The reason for filing the delay was the absence of information as the case related to the assets and property of the decision creditors was submitted by the court order. The request to stop the ban was dropped. Rejoice on showing good cause The legitimate banking court passed the order under which the lenders were ordered to collect the money from the lenders' assets, properties and persons so that they could be executed at a later stage. The justification for filing the petition was attributed to the absence of information that the assets and property of the judgment debtor had no benefit in coming to the holder of such justification as the trial court had ordered the judgment persons. In addition to their property and assets, the decree-holders will be able to arrest and decide Debtor can support the implementation of the detention order if the person did not apply Article 88 to be given to the implementation of the order within a period of three years set by the user. Any request made after the Limitation Act, 1908, shall be barred and no benefit can be exercised under Section 48 CPC, in such cases the High Court shall have any weakness in any order passed by the Implementing Court. Nothing illegal appeared, and it was in accordance with the law. Approved by the High Courts law firms from Choppar Hatta lawyer