HABIB BANK LIMITED versus MEDINA RICE AND ICE MILLS, SARGODHA
This application was loaned on behalf of Section 9 Contract Act (IX of 1872), Sections 148, 151, 152 and 172 for the relief of the suit and the loss caused by the bail suit by the testament That the bank has misused the testamentary stock and claimed invalid adjustment. The mortgaged goods banking court decided in favor of the bank by instructing the borrower to return the surplus stock. It was raised by the bank that the lenders were defrauding the bank at the time of making a pledge. Had committed and the lenders declared the mortgaged stock illegal where the penny was sued In order to recover the debt allowed against the protection of secured goods, the lenders were required to pay the same amount to the plant. Return goods ?? Maintain goods that are subject to natural wear and tear, which sells goods on the testament. S reserves the right to sell the goods after due notice, subject to adjusting the sale income of the suit filed by the borrower with C and the replacement or disposal of the mortgaged goods. Did not mention the facts in the allegations when, in response to a request for permission to defend the case, the bank claimed that the borrower had changed and the mortgaged stock bank was obliged to prove that Prove the borrower who misused and replaced the goods with poor quality mortgages which the bank has been able to prove. The High Court, however, rejected the banking court's decision and intervention because the aforementioned court had rejected the petition.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
