Find a Lawyer

MESSRS CONS (PRIVATE) LIMITED THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE versus INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN THROUGH REGIONAL MANAGER

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional application The lender's impression is that the forced sale value (FSV) of the assets charged by the bank was $ 1 million instead of $ 1 million, the State Bank The Dispute Resolution Committee of Pakistan, in its letter, revised its decision and reduced the settlement amount from $ 154 million to Rs 533 million. The question before the High Court was whether the Dispute Resolution Committee, in exercise of its discretion under the BPD Circular No. 29, has the authority to review it? The decision bank had previously defended the bank's refusal to comply with the revised decision of the committee on the basis that it had no jurisdiction to review the earlier decision, and that the revised charge settled the property dispute. Forced sales were based on a false idea of price. The borrower's point was that since the applicant had a duty to provide security of Rs 1 million, the value of his charged property should be considered at the same level. BPD Circular No. 29 was related to the forced sale price of a security charged by a borrower, rather than the cost of such security which was required to avail the facility, the applicant's argument based on the latter. There was, however, no such argument. For the purpose of the settlement of money settled by the Dispute Resolution Committee, the constitutional petition was dismissed as merit-free. patent advocate from Hafizabad lawyer