The request for leave was dismissed in the application for the recovery of sections 9 and 10, and the case was dismissed. Waldetti Platinum Bank complied with the provisions of Section 9 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance 2001 and supported all documents supporting its claim. The defendant, in his petition for leave to defend the case, could not have raised any legal basis for the plaintiff's bank to dismiss the plaintiff's claim, instead making a false claim that he was not a director of the company. Was the one who took advantage of the financing, claiming to be a liar in view of a certified copy of the Form 29 issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, the further dispute of the defendant which was merely an objection to which one or two documents. Signatures were charged, which, in the absence of any legal basis, did not justify S will. Submission of leave to defend a request by a user, and cannot be properly complied with by the supporter of Section 10 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Taxes) In the case of the Ordinance 2001, leave to defend the case Submitting an application for was not valid
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
