WARRIOR CHEMICAL (PVT.) LTD. versus NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN
Sections 9 and 10 of the Suits for Recovery Company (Appellant) filed a vacation grant to defend the claim, which was rejected by the company's banking court, for a grant of leave to defend the case. The application disclosed the facts that required the recording of the evidence. The company had refused to implement a loan agreement in the said application, and it specifically stated that the money under discussion was never distributed. That the original statement of accounts was made through a secondary statement of accounts, which could not even be taken into account by the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finance) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001). That the documents prepared by the bank (defendant) were not verified in accordance with the Bankers' Aviation Act, 1891, and that the recovery suit did not contain all the required documents that were filed with the bank's validity plan. Were not accompanied by a statement from The original statement of accounts was replaced by another statement of accounts, the documents could not be verified in accordance with the Proof of the Books of the Bank, 1891 the company's property was under mortgage the company had established a questionable case and its Applied for leave to defend the facts on request. A recording of the evidence is required, the appeal was accepted and the company was granted leave to defend the case
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
