The suit for the Sections 15, 16 and 9 Recovery was granted by the appellant to the mortgagee for the possession of the mortgaged property, after which the plaintiff banked through the plaintiffs' bank for recovery against the aforesaid property sellers. A request for has been filed. The Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance, 2001 was allowed to take over the mortgaged property, and the order of the Banking Court was withheld by the appellants, which was issued by Section 15 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Financing) Ordinance 2001. Was declared ultra. Mohammed Omar ratified the Constitution in Rathore v. Federation of Pakistan (2009 CLD 257), and for that reason no order could be issued to the plaintiff's bank under the provisions of the aforesaid section on the provision of mortgaged property, After filing a lawsuit for recovery by the plaintiff bank. , After issuing a summons under section 5 of the Act, the mortgagor / mortgagee / defendant cannot transfer the financial institution with any of its assets or property as alien, ambush, removal or share thereof. Security as a mortgage, hypothecation, charge, entitlement or otherwise. The final decision on filing a case for recovery under the Financial Institutions (Recovery) Ordinance 2001 is pending. However, the plaintiff does not vest with the banker with the right to take possession of the mortgaged property as was done in the present case, especially when it was recognized by the plaintiff bank that the mortgagee owned the property. No, therefore, there could be no order approving the grant of possession of mortgaged property.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
