Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD BASHIR versus CHAUDHARY ABDUL RASHEED

XXXO XXXVII, Rr, 1 and 2 - Kyrgyz Husna - Scope - The plaintiff claimed that although the credit facility provided to the defendant was named Kurzai Husna, but a nun and recoveries were also executed separately. Thi - the plaintiff originally referred to the loan presented to Kurz e Husna - the term was not used so was used as a financial transaction between the creatures. There was a loan payable at the lender's convenience that could not be received unless the loan was in the same state. - Defendant denies the signatures of the signatures and thumbs on the side and receipt - Justification - The Qur'an is the basic and basic source of the law and it is the complete code of code. The Qur'an itself was found - a debt of good graciousness / good debt indicated that whatever is given to anyone with a worthless and absolutely belief that he will get his reward in the next world - the retreat was that This loan should be a good thing - it should not be selfishly deceitful and it should be given to the pleasure of Allah, in the long run. Ryah was not available for further loans. Although the plaintiff in his case and evidence called the underlying transaction in the name of Qari Hassan, the same person was also reduced to a subsidiary and receipt form in which the parties. There is such a financial exchange between. - Although the defendant was publicly denied execution, both of these documents were shown with the defendant's signature - Signature

P L D 2017 Lahore 703

Before Ibad-ur-Rehman Lodhi, J 

MUHAMMAD BASHIR—Appellant

versus

Chaudhary ABDUL RASHEED—Respondent

Regular First Appeal No. 177 of 2011, heard on 20th February, 2017. Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)—

—O. XXXVII, Rr, 1 & 2—Qarz-e-Hasna—Scope—Plaintiff contended that though loan facility extended to the defendant was named as Qarz-e-Hasna but a pronote and receipt were also separately executed— Plaintiff submitted that term Qarz-e-Hasna actually denoted to a loan— Term was not used as a fiscal transaction amongst creature of pronote—Defendant contended that Qarz-e-Hasna was a loan repayable at borrower's convenience which was not recoverable unless the borrower was in a position to repay the same—Defendant denied signatures and thumb impression on the pronote and the receipt— Validity—Holy Quran is the basic and primary source of law and it is complete code of life—Term Qarz-e-Hasna was not coined by anybody, rather it was found in holy Quran itself—Qarz-e-Hasna/goodly loan signified whatever was given to another selflessly and absolutely with the belief that he would get the reward in the next world—Stipulation, however, was that the loan should be a "goodly" one i.e. it should not be tainted with selfish designs and it should be given for the sake of Allah, for the purpose of pleasing Allah—Term Qarz-e-Hasna was not available for a loan to be extended by a person in this world to another person—Although basic transaction was termed by the plaintiff in his plaint and evidence as Qarz-e-Hasna, but at the same time, such transaction was reduced into writing in the shape of pronote and receipt showing such fiscal transanction in between the parties— Execution of pronote although had been denied by the defendant, but both documents were shown to have been signed by the defendant— Signatures had been denied but not only Trial Court but High Court had also obtained his signatures in open court and, while comparing the same with the signatures available on referred documents, this was the consensus that both the documents were duly signed by the defendant—With the consent of the plaintiff I decree holder, the decretal amount was allowed by the High Court to be paid by the defendant/judgment debtor by means of monthly installments—Any single default would entitled the decree holder for lump sum recovery of the remaining decretal amount and for that purpose executing court, if approached, would be at liberty to proceed judgment debtor— Appeal was dismissed accordingly, [pp. 705, 708]

Sura Al-Baqra, Ayats 245 and 267; Tadabbar Quran, Jild-e-Awal by Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi; Sura Al-Maida, Ayat No. 12; Sura Al-Hadeed, Ayat Nos.57 and 16; Ahadid by Hazrat Abdullah Bin Masood; Sura Al-Hadeed, Ayat No. 18; Sura Al-Tighabun, Ayat No. 17; Sura Al-Muzammal, Ayat Nos.20 and 25 ref.

Haroon Irshad Janjua for Appellant.

Muhammad Kashif for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 20th February, 2017.

attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Fateh Pur lawyer