MST. ZARINA SHAMIM versus ZARAI TARQIATI BANK LIMITED THROUGH MANAGER
Section 9 (5), 12 and 22 For the recovery of debt, the former part decree, keeping aside the appellant against which the ex parte decree was issued, has served the summons in the defendant bank's suit. A request from the Banking Court that was referred to by the Banking Court was also served on the postal authority's report on the registered AD notice, which stated that the Appellant / Respondent had been served in two journals. Refused to accept the service, there was another note of postman recording in the AD form. Was available at the address on the processor server's report that it suspected that the financial support of Section 9 (5) of the financial institutions was a matter of service affecting the applicant in compliance with the ordinance, 2001 The matter was one. Appellant can best be considered to have served only by notice through publication; Belf did not offer postman summons and contradictory information; Appellant's deputy through registered AD filed against him. Appeal rejected in petitioner's limitation to set aside ex parte decree, filed tender section of the Financial Institutions (Financial Compensation) Ordinance, 2001, was inappropriate order providing opportunity for the parties to hear and to direct evidence. After doing so, the matter was considered before the banking court \ r \ n
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
top civil advocates from Sanghar lawyer
